LyrArc Article Gist
The risks facing China of slow growth and a bubble economy as the new leadership of Xi Jinping takes over in 2012. The export model for the economy is coming to the end of its run and the new leaders have to come up with a new plan for the future. At the same time they face the interests of state owned companies, banks and local governments interested in maintaining the status quo.

LyrArc Article Gist
Example of a aluminium company in Quingtongxia which disconnected from the national electricity grid and connected to the local electricity grid with the consent of the regional government to bypass the increase in electricity prices mandated by the central government in Beijing designed to discoutrage electricity consumption by energy intensive industries. As a result of this type of activity China has seen only a 2 % decrease in electricity consumption in the first half of 2007 by official estimates. To meet the goal of a 20% reduction in energy consumption per unit of output by 2010 China would have to see reductions in the range of 4% per year. This example of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region is an interesting one. Ningxia is in the western region of China and unlike the coastal regions which were the early beneficiaries of China's manufacturing boom years, this part of the country lagged behind. Its near Inner mongolia and far to the north west of the country near Gansu province. its one of the samllest o the provinces and autonomous regions, having a population in 1949 of about only 1 million, its since grown with migration and indutrial development but is still lagging behind. It has plentiful coal and so it is felt here that this is a natural resource asset that would help it grow in energy intensive industries like aluminium and help it close the gap with the coastal proivinces. The industrial development came to Ningxia only in the last 10 years so that its local economy and regional government officials feel they would be left out if they aren't allowed to catch up. So to them it all makes sense. Several other factors play a part. The rapid economic growth means more opportunities for relatives and friends of regional government officials. This is happening across China in coastal provinces and in the provinces of the interior. How can senior government officials in the coastal and large cities in the east point a finger at hese offendors when they are all beneficiaries of the same system and are using it to their benefit. And then there is the factor that rapid economic growth is considered the main objective if it slows down and there is social unrest from unemployment or other worker or farmer unrest then all government officials and communist party officials lose out if the communist party loses control. And the fear of chaotic years following social unrest create a common interest in pursuing rapid economic growth at all costs. So its a roller coaster that while the leaders in Beijing and Shanghai and the big eastern cities are aware of the risks and costs to the environment and other costs they are not able to control regional and local policies and actions....

LyrArc Article Gist
Property sales are estimated to fall by 28-33% in China, twice as earlier forecast by S&P Global Ratings. This is a steep decline that will affect the Chinese economy so dependent on construction. This week there were reports of property buyers in 100 cities getting together to withhold payments on unfinished apartments. Property developers depend on these payments as they have severe liquidity problems and need cash for operations.

LyrArc Article Gist
There may be psychological hurdles in China's growth with the effects on mental health from lockdowns in major cities, the revolt in the property sector with home buyers losing confidence in developers, the loss of confidence of foreign investors from US and EU. The dependence on the property sector to carry so large a burden of growth for the last 2 decades in China may now look like an error. The dependence on foreign investment may also be an error as the loss of confidence could mean some withdrawal and a lack of sustained investment.  It could even be said that restraints on both sectors property and foreign investors could have created alternative paths to growth, and reduced the shift of factories from the US and Europe to China that have now caused trade friction and and a reverse shift of investment back to home countries of US and EU. Trade friction has it appears backfired in a way that extends to the overall relationship which could have been prevented by preventing the hyper growth that happened. Greg Ip of the WSJ has argued that compared to Japan's growth in the sixties and seventies from a country of 100 million the hyper growth for a country of 1 billion for 2 decades created a massive impact on communities in US and EU that were dependent on factories that were lost to China. This has alienated large sectors of the public in the US and EU which could have been prevented by restraints on hyper growth in China. Ip says the growth was too large and too fast for the US to cope. It may have permanently damaged the relations between the two countries showing that trade and globalization had unintended effects when left to business and governments staying away from keeping an eye on how it was happening. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions raised about the government's committment to serious health care reform. New leaders of China who took power in 2002 and 2003 with concern for the poor, did not put discuss reform till 2006 and during this crisis there isn't the urgency that is needed. Recent documents, says the Economist, that were circulated secretly within the bureaucracy for 3 weeks before being made public, provide no clear target about how much people would be reimbursed for medical treatment. The other concern is that the central government provides only 40% of the 850 billion yuan allocated for additional spending on health care in the years 2009-2011. This is about $125 billion. Burt local governments may not be keen on spending on health care as officials are still judged by how much they can boost employment and GDP growth. Over three years the central government's annual share of the additional spending on health care of 850 billion yuan is 111 billion yuan, according to Caijing, a business magazine.But the 2009 budget on health care is 118 billion yuan, so its not clear that things add up. The central government's additional spending in each of the 3 years is only $16 billion. How this can provide help to the 200 million uninsured, the insured who still pay a large amount for health care, and pay for essential pharmaceuticals on a list prepared by the government, and pay a portion of the expensive diagnostic tests that hospitals like to make money from, is not clear. The whole system will have to be overhauled so that hospitals do not have the incentive to prescribe these expensive tests and pills that cost more. The government says it will be 2020 when 90% of Chinese are covered by agovernment financed health insurance system- 11 years away. This only means that domestic consumption may remain depressed for a decade or so. With export markets collapsing, this leaves China dependent on infrastructure spending for growth for a long time, and lower growth rates with higher unemployment. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The South China Morning Post, SCMP, looks at China at the 40th year of the great economic experiment  that changed China. This started with the Deng reforms by the then Chinese leader that opened up the economy in 1978. As this report points out in 1978 Deng Xiaoping's efforts at loosening the state control of the economy and business was actually a way to get out from the effects of the Cultural Revolution and prevent another Cultural Revolution. Deng was removed from office during the Cultural Revolution. Instead of unquestioned acceptance of Mao the new criterion was "Practice is the Sole Criterion for Testing Truth." In economic and business matters this was followed so that if it worked then the experiment was expanded, gradually giving life to the Chinese model of state capitalism, economic expansion under the state with the state supporting state corporations that operate in a market economy.  This means the Communist Party was to continue its control but with experimentation away from the planned economy in the coastal provinces of Guangdong and Fujian, and then into Shanghai. Experts close to Jiang Zemin, the next leader after Deng, say China's Communist state would not have survived without the changes started by premier Deng. Farmers still did not own the land but they were free to plant and own the yields for their efforts.  Deng established the Three Benefits Principle in 1992 trip to Guangdong, whatever helped increase productivity, increased the strength of the country and improved living standards was good, you did not judge it by whether it was socialist or capitalist. Jiang Zemin's work was to follow Deng's ideas and help negotiate the entry into World Trade Organization and set up the new economic regulations. Capitalists were allowed to join the Communist Party for the first time. State and local government ownership of land was turned into an advantage as this provided one of the critical inputs in terms of land for setting up new factories, with capital coming from savings, and other inputs of technology and investment coming from the U.S. after entry into the WTO brought American and European companies to China. A steady supply of labor poured in from the countryside and urbanization became a goal of Chinese development policies. Today India and other countries in Africa, Latin America, can look at the Chinese experience and effort and look for ways to modernize, urbanize and improve living standards, productivity and strength of their economy. One key is to experiment and look for what works that can then be expanded to other locations, and build on the advantages that may open up as the experiment makes progress. Following entry into WTO China was able to take advantage of overseas markets and build an edge in manufacturing, something that was not evident even in 1992.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Senators in the US Congress, Rubio and Schumer, have asked the US government to look into Apple's plans to work with Chinese semiconductor company YMTC. As a result the Commerce Department has placed export restrictions on YMTC. This NYT report looks at the two decade long rise of China and of Apple after Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1997 and shifted manufacturing to China. When Jobs returned to Apple he found major quality issues at Apple's manufacturing facilities, a demoralized workforce, and financial losses, with CEO Michael Spindler running the company into the ground. Jobs had to start with afresh model for Apple and decided to shift manufacturing to China under the engineering leadership of Tim Cook. Alabama native Cook went to Auburn University for his engineering degree and Duke for his business degree. Cook joined Jobs in 1998 at Apple and for ten years till 2007 the two cut costs, shifted to contract manufacturers and rebuilt Apple with new products, iPod, iPad and the iphone. By not manufacturing Apple avoided quality control issues, and the costs of maintaining inventory. It was Tim Cook who ran operations worldwide, and he gradually built up the manufacturing relationships in China with Foxconn, which makes most of Apple's products in sprawling Chinese factories that employ 20 years later about 3 million Chinese workers. Foxconn was chosen by Apple in 2000 to manufacture the Apple Mac laptop. Before that it was a parts supplier to Apple. Increasingly Apple relied on Foxconn to make its new products including the iPhone. Both companies growth relied on the manufacturing of Foxconn to the point where Apple was dependent on Foxconn and had intertwined its operations with Foxconn in China. Today the whole relationship is being called into question after two decades in which American workers suffered the effects of the outshoring of manufacturing jobs. It should be noted that though Mr. Trump raised the issue of manufacturing exclusively in China with Apple, the Trump administration did little to change the practices of the company that pioneered this type of massive manufacturing role for China. That surrendered the entire supply chain to foreign suppliers in the interest of cutting costs and maintaining huge profit margins, with which it financed an array of new products and reached $1 trillion in sales from $10 billion, hundredfold increase over 2 decades. American workers and families for the first time in American history got very little from this Cook-Jobs project. American infrastructure in communities that would have been supported by American factories including the services and infrastructure in communities financed through local taxes, a practice throughout the Industrial Revolution in the US, was sharply disrupted over 2 decades. It caused a rupture in social relations and increased inequality in the US, and defunded infrastructure that comes with manufacturing.  It is the task of the Biden administration to now correct what Mr. Trump simply talked about but never induced or required Apple to do- lead the resurgence of American manufacturing, and make its major investments in the US, invest in its workers and families, invest in America. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Nicholas Lardy of the Peterson Institute of Intenational Economics, and author of "Sustaining China's Economic Growth After the Global FInancial Crisis," points to the shortcomings in the World Bank/DRC Report "China: 2030." He says the issues raised by the report have been raised before during the last ten years about scaling back the role of state owned companies in development and growth and the way the government allocates resources. The report does not throw light on the why and what prevents this from happening. The report comes at a time when the risks that were brought up earlier, as Peterson says, are now accentuated and much larger. The share of domestic consumption as part of GDP has fallen, a larger share of real estate development in GDP, a bubble in real estate with the involvement of local governments and state owned companies in the speculative behaviours, and an increase in inequality. The report emphasizes that "the role of the government and its relationship to markets and the private sector needs to change fundamentally." To generate the kind of innovation for sustained development the private sector needs to play a larger role....

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ makes the America centric thinking mistake of forgetting where China started from in assessing progress and China's new priorities. In 1960 the World Bank shows China per capita at $90 which does not change much till 1990 when it was $300, the Deng opening to western technology and capital pushed it up to $3000 the year 2000 (US $36,000) and $4500 in 2010 (US $50,000) when the global financial crisis hit. Since 2010 the Chinese economy was burdened by high local government debt and struggled to get to $10,000 in 2020 under Xi Jinping's first two terms as president. Yet it paid a huge price for this -the chance of Bo Xilai (2014) upsetting the twin banners of Science and Modernization of the May 4th 1919 movement that set the course of China for 100 years uninterrupted through the Nationalists, the Japanese occupation, the Maoist CCP, the Deng CCP opening and Jinping CCP pullback. The huge inequality was seen as an opportunity for Bo Xi Lai or some other leader to capitalize on moving China in an unknown direction that posed risks for the future of China. Even then the first preference of Xi would be to carry on with what had worked after Deng. Yet it was clear that working class votes were shifting the dynamics of elections after the Trump election and closing the doors to open access to western capital, technology, and investment. With Trump in erratic and uncertain ways, with Biden after the elections of 2020 consistent and with single minded determination to limit flows. Not just Xi, any other Chinese leader would have had to have the internal discussions about the need to shift back to a model China was familiar with and one that worked before- that of state intervention in the economy, that of reducing the inequalities that posed risks for the CCP's survival as forging a path for stability to carry out the twin banners of the May 4, 1919 Movement - Science and Modernization as China's salvation. Unlike the hysteria about China posing a challenge to the US these internal debates of Xi and the party may have concluded that the US with about half the population of China's as it grows with immigration in the future and multiple times the per capita GDP was a country that no other country was going to come close to. In this sense the supply chains are deceptive as these are likely to be completely redone under the Biden administration to bring most important manufacturing back to China. It is in this context that Xi had limited room to manoeuvre and decided to focus on stability for the long term to fulfill China's dream of the May 4, 1919 Movement of the last 100 years for Science and Modernization casting aside the risks associated for instability of the inequality that comes with more of the western type of growth, and with the climate change risks also associated with it. Lower growth gives China a chance to correct some of the flaws of the hyper growth that was partly of its own making and partly thrust upon it by investors from the outside, so that the new climate would best serve the goals of the May 4, 1919 Movement of keeping high the banners of Science and Modernization. This kind of rethinking is also going on in the US in the same manner about inequalities and hardships for workers and families, with some of the anger directed at China as internal political sentiment- hence the trillions of dollars moved by the Biden administration to address the flaws of growth under free markets and intervene in the economy where needed as in climate change to give firm sense of direction. In a sense the direction taken in different contexts the American and the Chinese are the same - address the problems of workers and families, of the people, as Lincoln had pointed out and striven so hard for, so that Labor is the more important than Capital, and workers and families vital to the nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jawaharlal Nehru was leader of the party under Gandhiji which fought for independence in the 1930's. Under the India Act of 1935 India was given the opportunity to setup state assemblies and free elections  for local self-rule that prepared for eventual Dominion status similar to Canada and Australia. Rab Butler as India Secretary fought hard to get it passed through the British parliament. See Rab Butler in the adjoining articles gist. This is very important as none of what happened in 1947 the task of writing a new Constitution and a Constituent Assembly to do this for India would  have been possible without India Act of 1935- the initial training for elections and assemblies. Some good work was done for example in Tamilnadu Chief Minister Kamaraj under Nehru changed that southern state with progress in education, health, and industry over 15 years 1950 to 1964. By the seventies to the 2010 period the progress ran into serious problems first with one party followed by weak coalitions that led to poor governance, corruption and economic progress stalled. After the experience of China's modernization India is attempting a similar effort with Vision 2047 for modernization of infrasructure and development in speed and scale with one difference- the legacy of Rab Butler who no one knows about in India and forgotten in Britain, the simple document Hind Swaraj written on a British steamship from South Africa to England in 1912 by Gandhiji that asked Indians to self-reflect on their part in letting the British in "who made the Company Sardar?", the post 1950's leadership of Sardar Patel who like Rab Butler was also forgotten till 2014, Jawaharlal Nehru who won a third term in 1962 but was followed by a series of weak governments unable to steer economic progress of scale similar to China or Japan, Lal Bahadur Shastri cut short like JFK, and Narendra Modi who is bringing to the task the hard work and discipline that made it possible for first Japan and then China to modernize infrastructure and emerge as dominant manufacturing nations. Like Japan and China India with its own stumbling periods is making its way in the world today. Both Shastri and Modi are in the direct tradition of their Master, Gandhiji, in the words of Shastri "hard work is equal to prayer." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the euphoria for US stock market performance in 2011. Negative impact of housing market, rise in food and fuel prices, and the precarious condition of state and local government finances, raise concerns about the economy and stock markets for 2011-2012. John Makin sees a one third chance of sovereign debt crisis in the eurozone, and a 40% chance of China not making a soft landing, in a video interview with Wessel of the WSJ, December 30, 2010. This would impact stock markets in the US. WSJ's Brett Arends column also expresses similiar skepticism. Robini sees housing losses in 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
Juarez, the city across from El Paso, has done well in the last 10 months with 27,000 jobs added in the maquiladoras. These foreign owned factories continue to attract business interest even with a drug war raging in the background. The reason is that Juarez connects straight to American Interstate highways and this makes it possible to deliver goods in 3-4 weeks in some cases from the time of order compared to 10 weeks for China. And wages can run as low as $4.21 an hour. Companies get incentives in the tax treatment and worker training is supported by the local government.

LyrArc Article Gist
Competition in the Chinese market between Coca Cola and pepsi is shifting from the traditional carbonated beverages to juices, teas and non-carbonated drinks. Pepsi sells pulp based juiced under the name Tropicana Pulp Sacs, and Coca Cola has Minute Maid Pulpy. The Chinese governmet has discouraged acquisitions, and did not approve Coke's $2.4 billion acquisition of fruit juice manufacturer China Huiyuan Juice Group Ltd. Growth has to be maintained by investing and developing their own products for local tastes and culture. Both Pepsi and Coca Cola plan increased investments in China. Pepsi has 27 plants, five farms, and over 20,000 employees in China and expects to double the number of employees by 2015. Pepsi executives say Pepsi is following a"seed to shelf" approach in China, growing food on farms and developing teas and snacks for local tastes. In China Pepsi has a Lay line of chips with cool-cucumber flavors and Cao Ben le line of drinks based on Yin and Yang, cooling and warming. Pepsi's 13% growth in snack volume and 10% growth in beverage volume for its Asian, Middle East and Africa operations are mainly because of this growth in China and India. By contrast soft drink sales have declined for 5 years in the USA and come under criticism because of high levels of obesity in the USA. Pepsi's strategy is to move further into the interior of China, further west according to Pepsi executives. It plans to invest $2.5 billion in about 12 new food and beverage plants in the interior of China to be built over 3 years. Coke announced a $2 billion investment in late 2009, and is a lead sponsor for the Shanghai Expo. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bayer AG CEO Marijn Dekkers talks to the Journal's Geoffrey Rogow about the company's pharmaceuticals business and job retention. Dekkers says profits are reduced by the tight budgets of European governments and the pressure on pricing. He cites the 16% mandatory rebate in Germany on prescriptions. For Bayer diversification through the chemicals business offers a way to handle the ups and downs in the pharmaceuical business with patent expiration. He is not interested in acquisitions because of the high premium involved and the difficulty of recovering this for investors. Bayer like other drug companies has extensive operations in China. Bayer is training salespersons in top and second tier Chinese cities. It has a program to train 10,000 physicians in rural areas of China working with the local government. Dekkers makes an interesting point about jobs and job retention in the U.S. He says a lot of jobs were outsourced in the 1990's and its difficult to bring them back. Germany has done a better job with job retention with "kurzarbeit" and other programs working in partnership with industry. In his view this could have been managed better in the U.S. with active programs such as this in the last two decades....

LyrArc Article Gist
A recent book "The Spirit Level" has become popular in Britain. It says that countries with greater disparities in income also do worse in a number of social indicators, from higher murder rates to lower life expectancy. It also affects the consensus in society which is a necessary underpinning for sustained economic development and economic growth. Inequality when it affects the middle class and reduces the size of incomes in the middle, or creates stagnation in incomes, poses large risks for society and affects economic growth. In the US the home foreclosure crisis and the lack of bargaining power of wage earners in the middle class has created this problem. This is exacerbated by the banking crisis and bad loans in the banking system. Studies show that slow growth in college graduating rates in the USA after 1970 compared to the period 1900-1970, has increased inequality, especially with today's knowledge economy. Germany is also affected by this problem as wages for workers have remained stagnant with the labor reforms. Interestingly a combination of economic growth and payments to the poor have increased the size of the middle class and its incomes in Brazil. The austerity policies in Britain will affect incomes and income growth in Britain for the middle class. In China the gap is widening quickly between the urban areas and the rural areas. And the policy of residency permits- the hukou system-which limits internal mobility from rural areas to the cities and towns, makes the inequality all the more glaring. The lack of democratic election makes the situation worse in China compared to Brazil, because free elections in Brazil enabled leaders from the working classes such as Luiz Inacio Da Silva and Ms. Rousseff to emerge as heads of government. These leaders pursued policies that would explicitly bring a more shared prosperity in Brazil compared to the leadership in China. In China policies are determined by entrenched interests in its model of development- the state-owned companies and banks and their managers, local and government officials of the Communist party, and businesses with the networks and connections with the Communist party and local governments. This is why the ginni coefficient which measures inequality has dropped significantly in China, putting it in the rank of developing countries with poor records in equality. Inflation in China, India and Africa also affects the poor and lower middle classes to a greater extent. Current trends suggest that rebuilding the middle class in the developed countries and providing fairer distribution in developing countries will be of serious importance in coming years. Especially with the likelihood of more economic crises which tend to adversely affect the middle and lower classes disproportionately....

LyrArc Article Gist
The tensions that exist in Australian society, as a result of the large Chinese investments and imports of infrastructure building commodities such as iron ore, natural gas and other commodities. Australia's Pilbara region in the northwestern part of the country, has become one huge quarry for China, as an estimated 1 million tons of iron ore raw material is loaded onto 2 story high trucks each day- with automated driverless trucks system being implemented- and shipped by 2 mile long trains to waiting ships on the coast. Australians remember this done on a smaller scale in the 1980's by Japan. At the time Japan brought in Japanese workers. The same is true today but on a bigger scale, with China bringing in workers with lower pay. The concern now is what it was then, as one local leader put it- are we going to have towns with mines or mines with towns, he asked. The mining companies are looking at it purely as a commercial venture, and not investing in the towns. The towns now fear they will find the boom times gone someday and nothing tangible to show for it, no schools, hospitals and no infrastructure. And because the mining project companies fly people in and out, the 8000 aboriginal people in Pilbara- the original people of this land- see little of the mining expansion's benefits. Wandoan, a small place with 300 homes in the outback in Queensland, in eastern Australia, is an example of the gut wrenching change taking place in the mining areas. The lives of the people from the local pharmacy, the local supermarket, and the local ranchers, depend on the mining decisions made in China. This area was part of a planned, on again off again, $6 billion coal mine -part of a A$150 billion complex of natural gas and coal projects for exports to Asia in Queensland- and involved Xstrata buying 70,000 acres of the best grazing land for 7 coal mines. With the locals selling off, the mining uncertain, the supermarket closing, the whole town has the feeling of being up in the air, and fading out someday. Australian public sentiment recognizes this feeling, and at the same time is ambivalent about the impact. Polls conducted by the Lowy Institute for International Policy, show 73% of Australians feel Chinese economic growth has a positive impact, and at the same time 57% feel that there is now excessive Chinese investment, and 46% feel China will be a military threat in 20 years. Australians remember the same feeling about Japan's investments in raw material sources in the eighties. In 1988, polls then showed 70% of Australians saying there was too much Japanese investment, even though they also recognized that Australia had benefitted. The difference now is that there are also fears of China's influence, and foreign investment guidelines limit investments in Australian mining companies to below 50%. China's investment in Australia's natural resources comes in several ways: in the year upto July 2009 A$42 billion in export demand, A$3 billion in direct investment in Australian companies, and about A$5 billion in project financing. Iron ore sales to China amount to A$22 billion each year, and about one fourth of Australia's exports went to China, growing at a rate of 31% in 2009. According to the chief economist of Austrade, the government trade organization, Australia benefits from the economic relationship with China- this adds A$3,400 per year to every Australian household. Efforts to use some of the profits made by mining corporations for infrastructure and other public purposes, by increasing the mining tax have failed; as the mining industry launched a campaign against the government of Kevin Rudd, who was removed from office by his party. In the recent national elections, the ruling Labor party lost its majority, after losses in the resource rich states of Western Australia and Queensland. In the meantime the Australian currency has become the currency used by currency speculators who cannot use the yuan to make a bet on the currency- as the yuan is pegged to the dollar- and instead use the Australian dollar as a proxy. This makes it volatile, with the Australian dollar losing 10% of its value in a single day, when pessimism increased about China's growth forecasts. It also shows how much of the good story of employment and gdp growth in Australia is tied to the story in China, and the extent of the negative impact a reversal in this area can mean for Australians; especially now that the bad debt in the post-2008 explosion of bank lending poses risks to China's banknig system. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Investors in China fear that the overheated economy and property bubbles, may see a sharp turn with excessive tightening of monetary policy. China rebounded quickly after the 2008 crisis, but did this with a huge stimulus and by encouraging excessive lending levels. Some of this local government lending is suspected to have gone into low quality projects with the danger of bad loans. Inflation was 2.8% in April, and as lending tightens the Shanghai Composite Index has fallen 16% in the last month. The crisis in Europe, the extremely short 2-3 month horizon of mainland Chinese investors, the excessive supply of shares- attempts to raise $74 billion in share issuance in mainland and Hong Kong markets and an IPO of $30 billion for Agricultural Bank of China- all put pressure on stocks. OECD index of leading indicators for March 2010 show a drop from February, and the Chinese economy grew 11.9% in the first quarter 2010.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Bank of International Settlements warns that China's "credit to GDP gap" is 30.1. A figure of 10 normally is considered to be high and needs watching. The People's Daily carried an article presumably by president Xi Jinping warning about the consequences of the debt that had been growing "like a tree in the air." The debt to GDP ratio was at 255% at the end of 2015, and is up 107% since 2008 when the financial crisis led to a huge stimulus that has accelerated debt growth. The corporate debt is at 171% of GDP. The article in the People's Daily warned about reflexive stimulus every time growth slows and said that China cannot any longer "force economic growth by levering up." Cross border liabilities is one area of progress falling by a third to $698 billion, as companies cut debt quickly before the U.S. Federal Reserve raises rates. In the future China is more likely to roll over debt as Japan had done following its debt surge and bad debt with zombie companies, which would in turn lead to lower growth. In the past the government was able to absorb the growing debt because it was not as high as it is today, and the economy was growing rapidly. This is no longer the situation, the reason for alarm at the situation facing China. A spike in interest rates of 250 basis points is cited as one situation which could affect China adversely. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Apple shares are down 25% says this WSJ article and asks the question whether Apple's best days are past. In the fastest growing markets in Asia and Africa, Apple iPhones are beyond the reach of about 95% of the population. The number of Apple iPhones sold in India have dropped 40% in 2018 compared to 2017. Apple's market share in India has fallen from 2% to 1%, according to Canalys research firm. The $1.8 billion in Indian sales is about half of what Apple executives had hoped for when Tim Cook visited India in 2016. Some call it a rout. Tim Cook seldom mentions India now. At the center of this is Apple's reluctance to change its business model of getting the highest margins, making not a range of handsets, but a few models selling at high prices. This is the strategy that Apple has used to revive the company from near bankruptcy in 1997. Competitors including Xiaomi, the Apple for China and India, tweak their phones constantly to address local concerns for battery life, and lower prices to get market penetration. Only 24% of Indians have a smartphone and India is fastest growing market. Friction with the Modi government which cannot be favorable to Apple's plans to push a high  margin product when competitors have similar but better value packages.   In price sensitive markets of Africa and Asia most people buy phones outright and use pay as you go plans, Apple is not popular. Even in China Apple's market share is down from 12.5% in 2015 to 8% in 2017, according to Canalys. Apple is reluctant to make many models offering lower prices and to address concerns such as battery life in India. In India 39 million people will add smartphones in 2018 with 75% costing less than $250, 95% costing less than $500. In Apple's lineup the iPhone 7 costs around $550. Competitors such as Xiaomi, OnePlus, Oppo, and Vivo flooded India with smartphones costing less than $200. Unlike Apple which spurns market research these companies do extensive research work on local situation. OnePlus has focussed on battery life and gained 30% share of the premium segment to Apple's 25%. By making the devices in India these companies avoid having to pay the 20% tariff. Apple has so far not put up a new plant with the restriction that India places of single brand retailers over 51% foreign owned to buy locally 30% of manufacturing materials. The Modi government felt Apple was not focussed enough on bringing high tech jobs to India and helping local manufacturing, a perception not conducive to expansion in India where "Made in India" is the government plan. This means opening Apple stores in India is less likely now.  The turnover of Apple India executives is also increasing with 3 new CEO's 2017- 2019. Apple's strategy of targeting wealthier Indians makes it not even a fringe player in the Indian market down to 1% of the market. Just as it shrinks in the Chinese market where most customers are price sensitive and the economy is slowing.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As the USA and Europe move into a deep and prolonged recession China loses some of its biggest export markets and faces a significant slowing down of its economy. China's leaders are pondering how to respond to the crisis which will affect China, and meet the challenges of lower living standards of a neglected rural countryside and farmers compared to the urban coastal areas. This is still where some 800 million of the Chinese people live by official count, so something needs to be done to improve prospects and help generate higher incomes and opportunities for people in the farming countryside. Making land use rights of farmers able to be bought or sold for the first time would generate additional income for farmers, and help consolidate farmland into larger plots, which can use technology and improvements for better yields to keep China self sufficient in agricultural production. Keeping the situation the way it has remained for the last two decades, where local party officials and local leaders controlled the land and where farmers rights were ignored leading to suppression of farmer's protests for illegal land seizures and corruption, may have made it easier for plants to be setup across China and attracted foreign investors. But it has not been good for China's farmers. Chinese party officials at the local level who realized the advantages to them by controlling land and making it easier to set up manufacturing plants with foreign investors may have steered state policy in this direction from the early days after Deng's opening to capitalism and trade. Now with a success in the urban coastal areas and in building infrastructure Chinese leaders in the central government must be faced with a difficult issue of how to move on from here with the loss of China's export markets for its heavily export dependent economy. The need to generate a domestic consumer driven economy must not be lost on the Chinese leadership in Beijing. Something that will keep China's economy moving in the new situation. This is the context in which land use rights may be extended from 30 to 70 years and able to be bought and sold to improve farm incomes and generate internal momentum in the rural areas where most of China's people live. It also offers a contrast to the situation India faces where even the Nano plant of Tata Motors had to be moved from W. Bengal state to Gujarat state over farmers rights to land which in that case was also used as an issue for political agitation. The move by China accelerated industrialization and setting up manufacturing plants as land was taken over by local officials for use with foreign investors but also ended up neglecting the countryside, and created too big a dependence on exports....

LyrArc Article Gist
Risks to China's banking system from the bond market in China. China's bond market has grown rapidly to 25.5 trillion yuan or $4.1 trillion yuan, especialy in the period following the stimulus. But it is not similiar to bond markets in developed countries, the U.S., Japan and France. It has a patchwork of regulators, is closed to foreign investors, and does not offer protections to investors. It also lacks an effective ratings system. Most bonds are held and traded by the banks, which concentrates the risks in the banking system. In developed countries the risks are spread out among investors. Bond markets offer the advantage of reducing dependence on banks for lending but with banks holding most of the bonds in China, including that of local governments, the risks if bond issuers default are concentrated in the banking system.

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ provides a fact check of Trump statements on crime, debt, and taxes. Trump says he is looking at a new plan for taxes not the $10 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years reducing tax collection by 22%, but something about a third of the size. No details are available on the plan. WSJ disputes Trump's statement that the U.S. is "one of the highest taxed nations in the world." WSJ points out that the U.S. in 2014 for federal, state and local government taxes collected 26% of gross domestic product in taxes, compared to average of 34% for about 30 countries, according to OECD. Debt to GDP ratio is about 75% that is high, but because of low interest rates the budget deficit is less than 3% of GDP, which is close to the long run average. For this reason economists say the government should invest in infrastructure and R&D that supports long run economic growth. On crime the record is mixed with increase in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City, but decreases in Washington D.C. and Baltimore. Police shootings were 67 in 2016 compared to 62 in July 2015, and the high being 280 officers in 1974 when Nixon was President. Crime was an issue in the 1968 Republican National Convention during the Vietnam era protests, police shootings and terror incidents attracted attention in July 2016, yet the situation today is very different from the war protests of the Vietnam era. On terrorism fact checks by the NYT and in Lyrarc shows Clinton at State Department and Panetta at Defense Department taking hawkish stands only to hit a barrier from President Obama for taking action needed in Syria, Iraq and Libya. Panetta's new book calls for robust action where needed. A Clinton administration would take action with allies in the Middle East. Even Hollande and Obama who pulled the U.S. and France out of following up in the French-British Sarkozy-Cameron led intervention in Libya, have changed policy, with Obama calling it his biggest mistake. France under Hollande with the U.S. is now actively engaged in the Middle East, having changed policy. It is highly unlikely that a Trump led policy which alienates most allies in the Middle East- Iran, Iraq and Saudis- is likely to work better than a determined Clinton-Panetta led effort which has support of the local countries on the ground actually currently on both sides because of complexities of Middle Eastern politics.  On trade a new administration will still have to work with China, India, the European Union, and other countries, as global trade supply chains are not likely to evolve overnight. Lessons will have been learned by Clinton about the need to bring back jobs and ensure the strength of U.S. manufacturing. Economic and jobs growth will require prudence in strengthening U.S. manufacturing coupled with global cooperation, which a Trump administration that alienates trading partners without the possibility of making any serious immediate gains in jobs, is highly unlikely to do better.      ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Why polluting industries and colluding local government officials who are judged on the rate of economic growth achieved have come together and become entrenched to thepoint where its hard for the central government to implement pollution control measures. Deng's response to a sluggish socialist bureaucracy was to give power to local government officals to promote growth and to be judged on that basis. The environmental ministry and the environmental protection departments are very small and lack the resources to control these industries. And NGO's and the informed public and citizens are powerless to demand change as they are seen by the government as risking social stability by risking growth. After the East Asian crisis China anticipating a slowing down in competition with recovering Asian economies pushed harder for more economic growth. As a result production of steel set new records and the addition of power generating capacity each year surpassed the total power generation of countries like Britain and France.But this power generation does not use the modern technology available as it is costlier and takes longer to build. So a lot of short run decisions are being made in the interests of growth. An effort to introduce Green GDP backed by President Hu Jintao was dropped after it ran into a lot of resistance. Using this about 3 points of GDP were deducted from the 10% growth as environmental cost. This was based on modest environmental costs estimates and did not take into account the entire cost of pollution to health and the environment. China's own environmental experts think that Western estimates of environmental costs are if anything on the conservative side as they are based on models used in the west and conditions in China have little precedent in the scale and range of environmental degradation. Coal is burned to produce two thirds of the energy and uses older technology for power generation, it is a big polluter of the environment. And the modest energy efficiency goals set by the central government are not being met as a result China is already expected to be consuming as much energy in 2010 as it was expected by its own planners to be consuming in 2020. To informed outsiders it appears that the polutting process is systemic in its nature and only political change that allows people who are suffering the worst effects of this pollution to make their voice heard, can lead to reversing the trends that have been set in place from the Deng period of economic change that started in the 80's. ...