But stop lying. And if you are so angry and you still have something to offer come back when you are cooled down and more reasonable because right now you are just being mean and making this thread as bad as it was.
Made In China. - Page 6
Blogs > Disregard |
Glaucus
479 Posts
But stop lying. And if you are so angry and you still have something to offer come back when you are cooled down and more reasonable because right now you are just being mean and making this thread as bad as it was. | ||
ghostWriter
United States3302 Posts
You didn't forget a t, you wrote the wrong word. This kind of mistake is typical of an unintelligent person. | ||
Glaucus
479 Posts
In the mean time you should just stop being offensive. It's not helping anyone. + Show Spoiler + China's Simple Solution Peter Schiff As China grapples with the consequences of its devastating earthquake, it has also begun to finally confront the destabilizing forces bubbling up beneath its economic landscape. This week, several key Chinese officials, typically not known for their candor, conspicuously noted the need to both stimulate domestic consumer spending and bring down roaring inflation. While at first blush these two goals might appear mutually exclusive, China's leaders do have a magic bullet that can hit both targets at once. A stronger currency, commensurate with China's increased economic strength, will both tamp down inflation and allow Chinese consumers to buy more goods and services. However, for reasons not entirely clear to me, or few others for that matter, China's leaders are resisting this simple and beneficial solution. The Chinese leadership's stated goal in prodding their citizens to spend more is to decrease their economy's dependence on exports. If the Chinese, who currently save 50% of their incomes, saved less, more of their production would be consumed locally. As a result, China would be less vulnerable to economic downturns abroad. Without a vibrant domestic market, over-leveraged Americans will apparently remain China's most important customers. A strengthened Yuan would lower the real costs of goods for domestic consumers and allow the Chinese themselves to compete more evenly with consumers in other nations to whom they currently send the fruits of their labor. As goods become more affordable in China, the Chinese will naturally consume more. A rising Yuan would therefore kill two birds with one stone: it would reverse recent consumer price increases and it would induce Chinese consumers to buy their own products. If the Chinese were to follow such a sensible path, the consequences here in America would be immediate and severe. By allowing their currency to appreciate, Chinese monetary authorities would no longer need to buy and remove as many dollars from the open market, producing an immediate reduction in the demand for U.S. Treasuries, mortgage backed securities and other U.S. dollar denominated debt. The result in America would be a simultaneous increase in both consumer prices and interest rates. Such developments would only compound the problems already rippling through our economy. To spur domestic spending absent such currency rebalancing, Beijing must instead rely on the nominative, simulative effects of inflation. By further expanding their money supply and allowing those increases to be passed on to workers in the form of higher wages, Chinese consumers will have more Yuan to spend and hence will buy more. However, such a policy will only solve one problem by aggravating the other. Further, by penalizing savers through the erosive effects of inflation, China would discourage savings and jeopardize one of the true sources of its rising living standards. Contrary to the economic hocus pocus propagated on Wall Street, Washington and at American universities; economies grow not as a result of consumer spending, but as a result of savings. Under consumption is the true source of prosperity as it engenders capital formation, which lies at the root of sustainable economic growth. Here too the implications for Americans are dire. In effect, by only spending half of their incomes and lending much of the rest to us, Americans have merely been enjoying the current consumption that more frugal Chinese consumers have decided to defer. As the Chinese consume more, Americans will simply be forced to consume less. Low prices and rich consumers are a potent concoction that is sure to soothe China's roaring economy while raising the living standards of its hard working citizens. It's a simple solution that only an economist can miss. | ||
ilovezil
United States4143 Posts
I mean if he smartened up and actually knew what he was talking about, I'd just be reading a plain and boring economics discussion. | ||
Boblion
France8043 Posts
If you don't understand basic economics just make your own blog and ask people for help. | ||
ilovezil
United States4143 Posts
On January 10 2010 02:25 Boblion wrote: Jesus Glaucus almost makes me love China. It means how much he is annoying and ignorant. If you don't understand basic economics just make your own blog and ask people for help. *It shows that he is very annoying and ignorant. Or, even though you're not really supposed to end with a preposition, *It shows how annoying and ignorant he is. | ||
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On January 10 2010 02:51 ilovezil wrote: *It shows that he is very annoying and ignorant. Or, even though you're not really supposed to end with a preposition, *It shows how annoying and ignorant he is. Eh maybe i should make my own blog asking for English help o,o edit: not my main language x) | ||
EmeraldSparks
United States1451 Posts
On January 09 2010 22:48 Glaucus wrote: Consuming capital reduces wealth. How is consumption beneficial to the global economy? If no one consumed anything we would just have to produce a bit more than zero to be infinitely rich. The end purpose of production is consumption. A country where everybody produces a lot and everybody consumes a lot is far richer than a country where everybody consumes very little and produces slightly more than very little. On January 09 2010 22:48 Glaucus wrote: The US buys Chinese goods on credit. Credit that's loaned from China. They borrow money from China to buy their stuff. And the US isn't able to pay those loans back. So yes China is giving stuff for free. Yes, China is maximizing their production and that's something in itself. But all experts I have heard on the issue don't seem to understand why China is doing this. US Treasury bills are not worthless even if nobody is thinking about paying off the debt anytime soon. On January 09 2010 22:48 Glaucus wrote: EmeraldSparks is exactly right about this. But I don't see anyone attack him. I'm useful! On January 09 2010 22:48 Glaucus wrote: And all this is possible because of artificial low yuan. How is this not creating a bubble? We already know the US will have to stop spending and start saving or they will go into depression. Then China has to reorganize their factories to make stuff aimed at other markets. That's going to have some effect. Roubini is even predicting the next crisis to be in China. People have been predicting that China was in a bubble every few years ever since it took off. I recall there was supposed to be a bubble burst in the early part of the decade which people were predicting. Didn't happen. If you're claiming that China's model is unsustainable since the US will stop spending or that it will implode, well, in the event that the US economy does actually implode, they will be in a lot of trouble and will have to retool markets to focus on exports to other nations or the domestic market. But that doesn't mean there will be a devastating crisis; perhaps their growth will simply slow, and that doesn't mean that the current strategy is not a good idea for China at the present. | ||
ilovezil
United States4143 Posts
On January 10 2010 02:58 Boblion wrote: Eh maybe i should make my own blog asking for English help o,o | ||
koreasilver
9109 Posts
On January 09 2010 22:48 Glaucus wrote: Consuming capital reduces wealth. How is consumption beneficial to the global economy? If no one consumed anything, then there would be 0 demand and therefore 0 output as there is no demand to respond to, which would lead to the death of the economy. | ||
| ||