Arthur Kroeber: "China’s Economy: Powerhouse, Menace, or the Next Japan?"

[@TheSojoboUchiwa]

I think actually all of the three scenarios are kind of happening to a different degree

[@stephencyang6628]

1.4B educated and hard working humanity is a tremendous economic engine, under a largely meritocratic system, should continue to grow stronger.

[@osopolar9719]

They don't have 1.4B educated and hard working citizens though, not nearly that highly educated numbers by far, sadly.

[@acemiyamoto61]

Lol cry on whitey .😂😂east Asia is the new power baby

[@exoticredtadpole2713]

Let’s hope for Singapore on steroids. It would seem like that will be the case considering the recent liberalization of the Chinese bonds, stocks, and currency.

[@Rich-xg2cg]

I wonder how this analysis changes with the expected trend back towards centralized planning.

[@georgesiew2758]

There is a big lie in the "Capital Growth" VS "Capital Efficiency" argument. That lie is that "Capital Efficiency" doesn't exist. The crucial question regarding "Capital Efficiency" is, is there a magic recipe for using that capital efficiently? Market fundamentalists argue that there is and that recipe is the free market. While this is possible when performing hubristic empty theorizing, in practice this argument is not supported by the historical record. In practice it is not difficult for central planners to use capital efficiently in ways that are obvious. While at the same time it is difficult for the free market to find efficient uses for capital that are not obvious. The presumed advantage of the market is only that it can take on many views at once by hedging its bets on many different points of view. There are two problems with this presumption. First off planners can also hedge and place their bets with just as many different horses. Second free markets often don't hedge. Herding behavior is frequently rewarded in free markets and most market participants rely on this behavior rather than experimenting with independent thinking. This behavior can generate massive lop sided bets which often blow up and in the process squander huge amounts of economic value. The truth is free markets just as often as planners make mistakes, don't hedge their bets and burn lots of precious resources. When claiming that China doesn't use resources efficiently or doesn't use it as efficiently as Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Amazon, Walmart, Google, Apple, Exxon or General Motors, one should take note of the ruler that is being used to make this measurement. This is a measuring device that only understands the myopic profit and loss for an individual entity. It doesn't understand the network of interdependencies and non-linearities that exist in a real economic ecosystem. This myopia is how a breed of wolves can so optimize its individual calorie consumption to eventually collapse its ecosystem and then die out from starvation. The mold growing in fermenting wine while it embodies all the traits of self interested competition does not in the end have any foresight of the simple fact that the more it eats the sooner it dies. In economic parlance we would strangely call these things "externalities" even when one might wonder how something that originates from the system and can affect the system is in any way "external". The problem that China faces is really the problem that everyone faces. When all technologies are leveraged and capital stocks are saturated where then to obtain growth? Before China gets to that point though it has to first achieve the productivity that developed nations achieved. If we believe that, that productivity is achieved by nothing more than having access to technology and capital stock, and not by some genetic traits or piece of the soul that the Chinese are missing. Then it falls to reason that the Chinese will only get to this problem only once they have caught up with the west not before. Saying that the Chinese will run out of growth before they have caught up with the west is simply incoherent. Put in another way if you assert that China will stop growing before it reaches western levels of development then you must point out either the technology which they will not be able to adopt or the piece of capital stock that they will not be able to have. If you cannot identify either of these things then your argument can only hinge on some perceived genetic or spiritual deficiency of the Chinese.

[@georgesiew2758]

Another big lie is the contradiction between "Political Control" and "Economic Growth". No nation has ever grown without sufficient "Political Control" to direct the energies of individuals to work towards a collective group goal which is the growth of the aggregate economy. After all, individual gain in a group can be "win win" or "win lose". A nation who's growth dynamics are primarily of individual pursuing win lose objectives rather than win win objectives will not grow in the aggregate. The free market doesn't care about which of these two objectives people take. Moreover "win lose" growth is actually far easier to achieve than "win win" growth since you don't need to grow aggregate value which is an uphill battle against mother nature. All of this is to say that concentration of political power is a necessary condition for high powered growth. When a concentration of power is achieved and it is willfully directed towards win win growth then a society can grow in speeds far in excess of how fast it can growth when growth is undirected and randomly split between "win win" and "win lose" growth. Furthermore "win lose" growth is the predominant pursuit of individuals in highly developed economies where it has become very hard to further increase aggregate value. In those conditions without concentrated political power the economy will not grow and all efforts to motivate individuals to grow will simply increase inequality.

[@wflo9988]

China different from Japan in the population. 50% population are still farmers. They are still trying to get modernization, that is the driving force behind the “moving force” that is different from developed country like Japan.

[@rad9693]

罗文彬 true, but technically Japan is far ahead of China. I mean their technology and product they build is at a higher level. Does China have the capacity or capability of course, but China is more about how much product can we build at the lowest cost, quality of the product is not China's concern. I work with Chinese workers everyday, they tell me everything , and it's not far to these men and women who work hard, very hard. So, I'm on China's side, but they need to take care of the workers.

[@kwanarchive]

You do know Chinese manufacturing companies produce both the high end and the low end technology, right? Behind the branding, they're pretty much made in the same factories. You have to be really gullible to be taken in by branding.

[@pahatpahat9566]

After 4 years, it certainly looks like he is quite accurate with his observations on China's growth and future direction. It is unfortunate to note that in such observation, many still look at China's issue from a very political view as if the so-called democratic process is the only mean available for any society notwithstanding the havoc that the current corvid pandemic has caused to the so-called democratic societies where the average citizens are suffering from the rather poor actions of their governments.

[@dheera8889]

You mean people not suffering in China?

[@pahatpahat9566]

@@dheera8889 , Suffering as a term would depend on with what you are comparing it with. For example, the Dalits in India are definitely suffering from an archaic tradition notwithstanding the Government's lip service to that group of people!

[@dheera8889]

@@pahatpahat9566 I just asked if people are not suffering in China? Don't teach me relativity.

[@pahatpahat9566]

@@dheera8889 , Are you expecting Utopian scenario everywhere?

[@dheera8889]

@@pahatpahat9566 I thought you wanted to prove non democratic states are Utopia.

[@ahlim6791]

You miss the point,it is all about CPC leadership to became if not the largest economy of the world,the country is already have a strong foundation for economic growth,just waiting for the right signal to go ahead,the mao model did not work for great leaf forward,but then the Deng model took off.It won't like the next Japan because it is different set of circumstances however some will still read your book for thought provocation

[@JohnzeeMr]

this guys spouts bullshit, the Nordic Countries is worst than North Korea and yet nobody says their in crises, 30 years from now their Nordic capitals that is like most rural US cities will be outmatched by Myanmar, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and North Korea. China is not Russia mostly an uninhabited wilderness until Stalin forced Europeans into a Russian exodus.

[@sarcastic--sloth3780]

Good insight Arthur, really got me thinking about those dank issues. Wouldn't mind if you were wearing a little less clothing, gotta let those biceps breathe dawg 😘

[@qizhou9082]

After a year, looks back to this presentation, it seems china is exactly taking the economic reform that he suggest as the Singapore reform. Try to be more clear, it is still not clear for me which path is this government trying to take, need further observation.