LyrArc Article Gist
GE is moving head offices of major operations overseas like GE Healthcare moving from Wisconsin to outside London, England, where a company GE acquired Amersham is located. GE Money will move it head offices to London, England from Stamford, Connecticut. And GE Transportation moved its annual sales meeting from its head offices in Erie, Pennsylvania to Sorrento, Italy. GE now generates over half of its sales overseas and its fastest growth businesses are in infrastructure and turbines that are in Asia. With the slowing USA economy this point has simply hit home. And IBM which gets 65% of its revenue overseas has been a clear proponent of this strategy of locating where the growth opportunities are greatest, a poin not lost on Immelt at GE who sees it essential to be part of the culture you are selling to. IBM operates most of its software and services business from India. This is also true for things like Training and R&D increasingly moved overseas to places like Bangalore, Beijing and Shanghai. Another aspect of this is to expose Americans to working overseas and to avoid he insulation of becoming too immersed only in American culture and not be able to operate effectively in other cultures, languages and environments, where increasingly most of the action is....

LyrArc Article Gist
A new report, "China: 2030," by the World Bank and the Development Research Center (DRC), has major implications for the course of action taken by new Chinese leaders. The limits to China's economic model with the dominant role of state owned companies has been pointed out in the past. It has now reached a point where China must choose to move to a modified model or face the "middle income trap" of countries like Brazil and Mexico, where income levels and growth reaches a certain level and then decelerates suddenly with little warning. The report makes some major recommendations that would modify the current system. It says the state owned companies should be supervised by asset management firms focussed on commercializing these companies, and not supervised by the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC). The asset management firms would restrict the state owned companies on what areas they participate and sell off businesses to make it possible for private companies to compete. Zoellick says- "China needs to restrict the role of the state-owned companies, break up monopolies, diversify ownership and lower entry barriers to private firms." The state owned companies would be required to pay sharply higher dividends to the government which could then be used for social programs. Currently state owned companies invest in land which is sold by local governments for revenue helping fuel the real estate bubble. Significantly, the report had its origins when it was proposed by Mr. Zoellick, head of the World Bank, during a visit to Beijing in Sept 2010. It was supported by Li Keqiang, then vice premier, and now expected to be the new prime minister of China. The World Bank is widely respected by Chinese leaders because of its assistance during the early stages of reform in the 1980's. The DRC reports to China's State Council, a top governmental institution, and the No. 2 person at DRC, Liu He, is a senior advisor to the Politburo Standing Committee. He helped draft the current five year plan and is close to Li and Xi Jinping, the next president of China. The SASAC has opposed these ideas, especially any shift in its personnel selection of management at the state owned companies, which it shares with the Communist party's personnel department. Respected China economists say China faces large risks of a sudden sharp slowdown because the the state owned companies have largely copied foreign technology and have not generated enough technological advances, which will be needed for the next stage of growth. Lower growth rates could worsen problems in China's banking system leading to a crisis. The Conference Board, estimates China's growth at 8% for 2012, slowing to an average annual growth rate of 6.6% from 2013 to 2016. Barry Eichengreen of UC Berkeley, Donghyun Park of the Asian Development Bank, and Kwanho Shin of Korea University, say the annual growth rate will drop by at least 2 percentage points by 2015....

LyrArc Article Gist
Berlin based China studies center MERICS experts say China's weak spot is domestic consumption, as it is too reliant on export demand. These experts say overseas demand from Europe and US has held up in recent months, but where would China pick up manufacturing production when this demand slows down? Stimulus is seen as risky by experts and contradictory to efforts by the Chinese government to reduce debt based financial risks, with the debt built up in hypergrowth of two decades since 2000. Much of this hypergrowth itself has resulted in trade tensions with US and today puts China in what MERICS calls this "tricky situation." This situation resulted from growth since 2000 that was was unleashed from local governments in China with failure to control it from the central government in Beijing to reduce its impact on deindustrialization of towns and communities in the US and Europe. A lesson that China's planners may be looking at as they look to the future for more balance and quality of life,  and dignity of life for rural, town and city communities across China. Politburo CCP's standing committee has put forward the idea of a "dual circulation economy" to reduce dependence on foreign demand, and balance it with growing domestic demand, yet experts at Berlin base MERICS say this has not happened. A report from the Atlantic Council says without domestic demand picking up the pace of China's growth, China would have difficulty growing beyond 3% annually by 2025.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
GM executives say China's auto market could reach 17 million in 2010 and 19 million in 2011. This is up from the 13.7 millon vehicles sold in China in 2009. More Chinese are crossing the threshhold of making $3000 to $4000 a year, as a result sales are booming in smaller, lesser-known cities in the inland western parts of China. Also helping is government vehicle purchase incentives as part of the stimulus policies.

LyrArc Article Gist
Apple did its first product launch in China with the launch of the iPhone 5C in China. The phone is priced at $99 in the U.S. and targets buyers at the low end. In China where subsidies kick in later in lower monthly phone bills the price is much higher at about 4500 yuan or $733. Buyers in smaller cities in China pay about 1000 to 2000 yuan for a smartphone. Apple's market share is about 5% in China, behind Samsung at 18% and Chinese manufacturers Huawei, Lenovo and HTC.

LyrArc Article Gist
Keith Bradsher provides a detailed account of how the new high speed rail system is transforming China by making access to distant cities possible, sometimes in a few hours.

LyrArc Article Gist
What Handan Iron and Steel in Hebei Province 300 miles south of Beijing and ThyssenKrupp in Dortmund, Germany, have in common. The transplanting of Germany's aging defunct iron and steel furnaces and plant to Handan, boxed and crated away- its unreal that in 1998 Handan Iron and Steel bought and transferred an aging polluting plant to a city where the steel works are located in China which has 8.5 million residents. When years later the steel works were debated to be moved to a distance away from the city with Baoshan Steel, the decision was made to instead put a new plant there instead. The solution was to make pollution payments to residents of Handan. It was Mao's dream to build a steel industry in Hebei province ,which has large deposits of iron ore and coal and a rail line. Couple of questions come up to mind- one why did the first steel works go up right in Handan, and same is true of Dortmund, labor supply perhaps but couldn't homes be built nearby instead and these plants located away from cities. Second the deal for bringing the ThyssenKrupp plants was as recent as 1998, by this time China was already a big steel producer (producing more than the US by one estimate) and in a few years Chinese steel production was to exceed the US, Europe and Japan combined. With steel production already on the rise why didn't China move more carefully. Some of the Thyssen Krupp assets were built only a few years before 2000 and met stringent environmental control. China bought these.. Why didn't China pick out the best assets instead of old aging blast furnaces. The possible answers are that they were available at cut rate prices, but were they worth it. The second is that Hebei must be competing with other parts of China, and there wasn't a rational allocation of capital as would happen if a sophiticated company like a Mittal or a Tata Steel is involved. Is China operating on a outmoded concept- nationalism, competition between provinces with local government officials running the show? The other question is that in the case of the automobile industry a different pattern is seen, the most modern technology was selected , and in the case of Cherry, the most recent technology was selected for manufacturing cars, then why was this same pattern not adopted in the case of steel. In the end China has a surplus of steel mills, which makes this rush into steel production without carefully thinking through this appear to have been a mistake. The visual picture if one flies into Dortmund of manmade lakes, green park areas and residential housing and shopping from the $22 billion the EU and Germany are investing to turn the Ruhr valley region of Dortmund into a centre of education, technology and tourism now contrasts sharply with Handan in Hebei province. Can emerging countries do better, build manufacturing for jobs but keep living conditions in mind, be patient and work to achieve the best overall results, and build education, technology, appropriate for their own situation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The trial of former Security Chief Zhou Yongkang is held in Tianjin, China, in secrecy. He is senteched to life in prison in June 2015. This is part of president Xi Jinping's fight against corruption in China.

LyrArc Article Gist
In China since 1981 the poorest people making below $1.25 a day fell to 207 million in 2005 from 835 million in 1981. In India the number of people below $1.25 a day increased to 455 million in 2005 from 420 million people in 1981. The share of the people in poverty fell to 42 percent from 60 percent during the same period. Corresponding figures for East Asia including China show a drop from 80% of the people in poverty in 1981 dropping to 18% in 2005. The proportion of people living below the $1.25 a day poverty line worldwide fell over the nerarly 25 year period from 1981 to 2005 from 52% in 1981 to 26% in 2005. In subSaharan Africa, now the poorest region half or 50% of the people live under the poverty line of $1.25 a day in 2005 almost where it was in 1981. In absolute numbers the region had 380 million people living below the poverty line in 2005 compared to 200 million people in 1981. Note that the World Bank this year changed the poverty line from $1 to $1.25 a day, to make allowance for the inflation that is hitting the poorer countries. Is China a rich nation after the Olympics? Some parts of China, the coastal regions and the regions around big cities like Shanghai and Beijing are relatively affluent with pockets of poorer people but in the rest of the country there is poverty as defined perhaps in terms of deep poverty, poverty, poor middle class without health insurance or any kind of savings for emergencies. With 200 million people in 2005 below the poverty line a question could be asked how many people in China below say $2.00 a day which could be seen as being poor at a time when inflation in food and fuel costs has been significant in developing countries. If its somewhere in the range of 300 and 400 million people in China this explains why in relative terms China would identify with India and the rest of the developing countries and it also explains its stand in the WTO trade talks acting as a developing country protecting the rights of agriculture and farmers within China. And it also explains the reasons why China sees a long transition before it ceases to be a poor developing country and why there is real concern that these 300-400 million people as well as others adversely affected by the rapid industrialization and exercize of state authority, corruption and increasing gaps between rich and poor, adverse effects on environment, that these people adversely affected are listened to and accomodated in the interests of stable progress and fairness. Much of recent history has shown that countries open to foreign trade have done better given the right conditions and careful policy measures. China opened up around 1981, and India around 1991. Also progress and gains are more significant in infrastructure building and in poverty reduction in the latter phases of development as the synergies increase, capital pool increases, and the development accelerates, this shows why China's gains look significant compared to India's at this point in time. In ten years or fifteen years a better assessment could be made and then some points may favor China and some India, and the results will be a result of different history, experiences and problems faced and routes taken because of prior developments in each region and varying complexity. ...