China

[Luke]

43 minutes ago, hillfronter83 said:

The big difference is that the interests of Chinese government and its people are not aligned. Chinese people (shareholders) get a much smaller piece of its GDP.

 

Here is a good thread for understanding the fundamental issue with Chinese economy. And here is the link to the original article in Chinese.

http://m.xugaoecon.net/nd.jsp?id=16

 

 

 

 

This economist has a point and Xi starts a common prosperity program-->Market--> CHINA BAD

[Sweet]

34 minutes ago, Luca said:

I cant believe that you are convinced of "separation of powers" within the US. Reality is that the US is completely dominated by business interests and the pendulum is way reversed compared to china. Yes, that's good for shareholders but the US consumer isn't looking particularly bright either where 45% earn below 29k USD a month and concentrated markets with lacking competition will bring their own ills to an economy over time. 

Disagree.  Sorry Luca.  I can’t understand how you are unable to see what are clear differences.

[Luke]

41 minutes ago, Sweet said:

Disagree.  Sorry Luca.  I can’t understand how you are unable to see what are clear differences.

 I did tell you exactly what the differences are. Shareholders are place number 1 in the US, understood? Thats a clear difference I pointed out. But I also told you that that doesn't necessarily mean good things for the overall economy, people's well-being, achieving a higher level of civilization, etc. 70% of people in the US are overweight or obese. But nobody regulates or does anything. There are many more examples of this. 

 

 

Edited April 10, 2024 by Luca

[Luke]

How many hours do US teens spend on their phone everyday watching junk reels, playing games etc? If you look at some statistics, its horrific how many hours it is. But China is the bad guy to regulate that and their technology companies? 

How many people in the US are underpaid and work 2 Jobs to survive? Why is China the bad guy for common prosperity? 

The price hikes in food, other consumer products etc are also one example of too concentrated markets and too little competition, why do i have to pay 20 dollars for a junk burger meal? Why do i need to pay too much for cars when china now makes them better, cheaper and is even willing to send them to my front porch? But they are not allowed to do that...i wonder why that is...

 

[Luke]

So how will the economy look like who regulates the bad things and how will the economy look like who doesn't? The picture is plain in sight, 70% of people overweight or obese, teens spending 5-8 hours on their phone everyday, 20% of adults diagnosed with depression in their lifetime, 10% with depression within a year, one in six people on psychiatric drugs for what reason? Because US is the greatest place on earth and everybody does better than all other countries? How many people come on top due to other drug abuse? Alcohol? 

 

But yes, we need way more free markets because that will do what? 

[Luke]

It is no surprise to me that real problems in the US but also the west are overlooked and instead we are focussing on fake problems like all these transrights, women rights whatever rights which do what? Will we be happier when finally trans people can work 80 hours a week or 1 out of 1m transpeople plays a role in a disney movie? 

 

Its a fake public debate, a false flag operation to divert peoples attentions from real problems which nobody wants to solve. At least the SP 500 is at 5200 basis points...and 0.1% can go to an ivy league school while the rest either has to go in debt for private schools or live with the low quality public schools...the majority of Americans is NOT doing well. 

 

And China is the problem...and always bet on America! 

 

Long China honestly. 

[Luke]

And also dont get me wrong, i dont hate the US. I think the US can be a GREAT place and has SO much to like. Culturally, nature, many great people too, great history, very advanced economy, etc. But China is discounted so much and you can find problems in both countries. US tech is also very strong but also very expensive. Munger is right, we can all do well, Chinese, and US...and we should have a lot of free trade together...

[Malmqky]

5 minutes ago, Luca said:

And also dont get me wrong, i dont hate the US. I think the US can be a GREAT place and has SO much to like. Culturally, nature, many great people too, great history, very advanced economy, etc. But China is discounted so much and you can find problems in both countries. US tech is also very strong but also very expensive. Munger is right, we can all do well, Chinese, and US...and we should have a lot of free trade together...

If you don’t mind me asking, what is your nationality? Are you Chinese by chance? Or are you Eastern European/Asian? American? 
 

I ask because nationality plays a large role in this. If you ask a Chinese person what they think of Japan, you’ll get a negative answer. Or ask someone from the Middle East what they think of America. Another negative answer. Or god forbid, ask a Palestinian what they think of Israel.
 

I think it’s hard to be objective about other countries, especially if you haven’t lived in them. I can tell you the pros and cons of America, but China I can only tell you what I’ve learned through media and secondhand stuff from my Chinese friends.

 

For what it’s worth, I think America is trending towards a pseudo-oligarchy while China is heading towards authoritarianism/is already there. Lots of negatives for both countries, as well as obvious pros.

[Sweet]

25 minutes ago, Luca said:

 I did tell you exactly what the differences are. Shareholders are place number 1 in the US, understood? Thats a clear difference I pointed out. But I also told you that that doesn't necessarily mean good things for the overall economy, people's well-being, achieving a higher level of civilization, etc. 70% of people in the US are overweight or obese. But nobody regulates or does anything. There are many more examples of this. 

 

 

Yes that’s a difference but not the main one, it’s the differences in the system that are most important which I described in my post earlier.  You claimed an investment in China and US stocks are ‘both are the same thing’.  It’s not in my view.  The US system is inherently less risky for investors.

[Sweet]

2 minutes ago, Malmqky said:

If you don’t mind me asking, what is your nationality? Are you Chinese by chance? Or are you Eastern European/Asian? American? 
 

I ask because nationality plays a large role in this. If you ask a Chinese person what they think of Japan, you’ll get a negative answer. Or ask someone from the Middle East what they think of America. Another negative answer. Or god forbid, ask a Palestinian what they think of Israel.
 

I think it’s hard to be objective about other countries, especially if you haven’t lived in them. I can tell you the pros and cons of America, but China I can only tell you what I’ve learned through media and secondhand stuff from my Chinese friends.

 

For what it’s worth, I think America is trending towards a pseudo-oligarchy while China is heading towards authoritarianism/is already there. Lots of negatives for both countries, as well as obvious pros.

 

I could be wrong, but I think Luca is Chinese but living in Europe.

[Luke]

20 minutes ago, Malmqky said:

If you don’t mind me asking, what is your nationality? Are you Chinese by chance? Or are you Eastern European/Asian? American? 
 

I ask because nationality plays a large role in this. If you ask a Chinese person what they think of Japan, you’ll get a negative answer. Or ask someone from the Middle East what they think of America. Another negative answer. Or god forbid, ask a Palestinian what they think of Israel.
 

I think it’s hard to be objective about other countries, especially if you haven’t lived in them. I can tell you the pros and cons of America, but China I can only tell you what I’ve learned through media and secondhand stuff from my Chinese friends.

 

For what it’s worth, I think America is trending towards a pseudo-oligarchy while China is heading towards authoritarianism/is already there. Lots of negatives for both countries, as well as obvious pros.

I am coming from the cosmopolitan country Germany haha! 

 

I'd say I can look with reasonable neutrality to both the US and China from this place. 

 

 

[Luke]

22 minutes ago, Sweet said:

Yes that’s a difference but not the main one, it’s the differences in the system that are most important which I described in my post earlier.  You claimed an investment in China and US stocks are ‘both are the same thing’.  It’s not in my view.  The US system is inherently less risky for investors.

That is nothing new, we all know that and I said Shareholders are No.1 in the US. I still think you wont get fked over as Munger said. 

Edited April 10, 2024 by Luca

[Luke]

24 minutes ago, Sweet said:

I could be wrong, but I think Luca is Chinese but living in Europe.

Lol! I am 100% european, family coming from northern Germany, also great grandparents etc. no family history in China/Asia

Edited April 10, 2024 by Luca

[Sweet]

9 minutes ago, Luca said:

That is nothing new, we all know that and I said Shareholders are No.1 in the US. I still think you wont get fked over as Munger said. 

Munger’s investment is BABA is one I could never understand as it seemed entirely at odds with his philosophy on life.

 

Apologies for mis-ID’ing you.  Thought you were Chinese.

 

Edited April 10, 2024 by Sweet

[Luke]

3 minutes ago, Sweet said:

Munger’s investment is BABA is one I could never understand as it seemed entirely at odds with his philosophy on life.

 

Apologies for mis-ID’ing you.  Thought you were Chinese.

 

Wasnt Munger always fascinated about China and their work ethic, fascinated by BYD too...fascinated by Li Lu, had large portions of family wealth invested in Asia and bought a LOT of Baba for his own family besides for DJCO...

[Sweet]

1 minute ago, Luca said:

Wasnt Munger always fascinated about China and their work ethic, fascinated by BYD too...fascinated by Li Lu, had large portions of family wealth invested in Asia and bought a LOT of Baba for his own family besides for DJCO...

Sure, and he is right, they are one of the oldest civilisations in the world, the people are dedicated and hard working.  However munger based a lot of things on trust and morals and whilst I think the ordinary Chinese people have that in buckets, I find the domination of their country by a single party and one man immoral, and I don’t trust the party or its leader.

[Luke]

https://www.scmp.com/business/china-business/article/3258812/chinas-stock-market-beijing-issues-unprecedented-guidelines-calling-transparency-risk-management?module=top_story&pgtype=homepage

 

China has issued an unprecedented set of policy guidelines to push for transparency, security, risk-management and vibrancy in the country’s US$9 trillion stock market, sketching out a view of what the world’s second-largest capital market could look like by the middle of the century as Beijing solidifies its goal of becoming a financial superpower.

 

The document released by the State Council after the markets closed on Friday evening sets out nine guidelines that formulate a framework to develop the market, demanding a better mechanism for protecting investors’ interests and an improvement in the quality of listed companies over the next five years.

 

By 2035, the market should have achieved “a reasonable structure of investing and fundraising” in which listed companies will have demonstrated a significant improvement in quality, it said. There must also be demonstrable progress in cultivating first-class investment banks and financial institutions.

 

The push highlights the fact China’s state support for its stock market has entered a new stage, with some of the supportive measures proposed by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) now being written into the State Council’s documents. It is rare for China’s cabinet to issue documents directly targeting the stock market, with the two previous such occasions occurring in 2004 and 2014, both preceding a raging bull market.

 

Friday’s guidelines complement four documents issued last month by the CSRC pledging to crack down on fraudulent listings, raise the threshold for new listings and require publicly traded companies to return more to investors through buy-backs and dividend payouts.

 

According to the document published today, companies will be required to disclose their dividend payout policies when they list, and stricter rules on information disclosure and corporate governance will be implemented to restrict stake reductions by major shareholders and push listed companies to boost investment value.

 

The regulators will also work out standards for abnormal trading and manipulation, issue rules to strengthen the supervision of high-frequency transactions, and mete out severe punishments in cases of malicious manipulation and short-selling, it said.

 

The document also called for the fast-track approval of exchange-traded funds, the expansion of index-based funds, and a higher proportion of stock-focused funds in the mutual fund industry.

[WFF]

On 4/10/2024 at 11:38 PM, Sweet said:

Apologies for mis-ID’ing you.  Thought you were Chinese.

I was actually thinking the same thing too.   It is actually quite rare to see a westerner being so pro China. 
 

My two cents as an ABC who has lived in China and the US (also in SEA),  media biases is rampant. No one system is better than another.

 

I have had discussions with people that privately question whether democracy really a good thing?  Should everyone really have a vote, because a lot of people can’t be hold accountable for their vote. 
 

At the same time in China, the bias against the Japanese is also overblown.  A lot Chinese executives are using Japan as a case study to learn and adapt.  For example both society have a strong Confucius culture, focus on education, high savings, etc.  They are in awe at times.  

 

Li Lu in his book summed it up quite well regarding biases (TLDR : Civilization formation paths).  
 

I like China and I like the US, I don’t think it has to be winner and losers and they can both win.   Though,  a lot of negativity is because the current free trade situation did not result in win-win, but win-lose.  Robert Koo explains it, which really challenges a lot of shortcuts (ie. free trade is good), that has given me food for thought on a lot of trained beliefs.  

Anyway not trying to start a debate or discuss politics. Just want to share my two cents.  

[Jaygo]

I kind of have to give it to Luca here. The CCP is regulating for the Chinese's populace, the US and Canada i'm not so sure.

 

In Canada i'm regulated to shit but it never seems to be regulation in my best interest. Its more about protecting an industry or organization. 

 

A quick example would be a playground at my kids school. I have a quote for $ 82,000.00 from a school approved vendor. I can buy the exact ( exact! ) same structure on Alibaba for $ 11,000 including shipping. I could put it up for another 5-10k max. It requires 18 post holes with cement and then assembly.

 

The board has indicated that it must be a board certified vendor and the playground needs to be certified. Ok so lets just assume the board is concerned with safety of the kids.( yeah no shit, they are my kids and their friends) why not allow other vendors to be allowed into the bidding process. The structure is coming from China, getting a certification plate in canada and then the vendor is making 60 k in a week or less.  

 

The end results of most regulation in NA is to reduce competition and protect incumbents inmo, not to protect our youth who are dumbing at an alarming rate or to protect our heath and best interests. 

 

Having never gone to China i am not totally sure but most Chinese i know are kind hearted in general , a bit rude and pushy especially if a lineup or free stuff is involved, mostly peaceful and very hardworking. All together pretty damn good people just like everyone else.

[cubsfan]

2 hours ago, WFF said:

 

I have had discussions with people that privately question whether democracy really a good thing?  Should everyone really have a vote, because a lot of people can’t be hold accountable for their vote. 

 

Of course democracy is a good thing!  IT's a great thing. It's far from perfect. It's not free. And it always has to be worked on - why would a great thing like democracy be easy??

 

To take a vote or a voice away from anyone is a grave injustice.  And like the views of the communists - when you start thinking your voice is more important than others - you're headed to totalitarianism.

[james22]

6 hours ago, WFF said:

I have had discussions with people that privately question whether democracy really a good thing?  Should everyone really have a vote, because a lot of people can’t be hold accountable for their vote.

 

Yeesh.

[Luke]

13 hours ago, cubsfan said:

Of course democracy is a good thing!  IT's a great thing. It's far from perfect. It's not free. And it always has to be worked on - why would a great thing like democracy be easy??

 

To take a vote or a voice away from anyone is a grave injustice.  And like the views of the communists - when you start thinking your voice is more important than others - you're headed to totalitarianism.

A philosopher king leader party who enables superb outcomes is IMO preferred compared to a flawed democracy that enables inferior outcomes. Outcomes matter the most, not the process towards the outcomes. 

 

Also, democracies run into the threat of becoming capital oligarchies as can be seen in the west, the government is sold to the highest bidder with the deepest pockets and the economy stalls in benefit to the very wealthy. This is an edge the CCP has and why the West is so afraid of them. China will and does have a more competitive and more efficient industrial system, that can produce products for cheaper because public infrastructure is not privatized and monopolized by the financial sector but belongs to the government, banks, energy etc. They are turning more towards SOE owned key infrastructure because they see that the financial sector just wants to monopolize these assets which makes them a lot of money but labor suffers making the overall economy less efficient. Musk said it already, China is a powerhouse next level and nobody can beat them, energy will be a lot cheaper, factories are all next to each other, short supply chains, huge talent pool etc. 

 

So who will be happier, the person living in an almost fully automated, highly technological very wealthy society that cares about lifting everybody up in the "navel of the earth" or the highly privatized deindustrialized society that belongs to the financial, insurance and real estate sector that owns the government and monopolies stalling overall growth and development? 

Edited April 13, 2024 by Luca

[Luke]

https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-en

 

It follows that policies to reduce income inequalities should not only be pursued to improve social outcomes but also to sustain long-term growth. Redistribution policies via taxes and transfers are a key tool to ensure the benefits of growth are more broadly distributed and the results suggest they need not be expected to undermine growth. But it is also important to promote equality of opportunity in access to and quality of education. This implies a focus on families with children and youths – as this is when decisions about human capital accumulation are made -- promoting employment for disadvantaged groups through active labour market policies, childcare supports and in-work benefits.

[Luke]

Just now, Luca said:

https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-en

 

It follows that policies to reduce income inequalities should not only be pursued to improve social outcomes but also to sustain long-term growth. Redistribution policies via taxes and transfers are a key tool to ensure the benefits of growth are more broadly distributed and the results suggest they need not be expected to undermine growth. But it is also important to promote equality of opportunity in access to and quality of education. This implies a focus on families with children and youths – as this is when decisions about human capital accumulation are made -- promoting employment for disadvantaged groups through active labour market policies, childcare supports and in-work benefits.

China follows basic economic research by OECD policy advise to generate MORE growth for their overall economy but LESS growth for monopolies and concentrated markets. But nobody wants any redistribution in the US and both republic. and democr. basically run the same elite clientele political program, ruin the power of labor, don't regulate monopolies and concentrated markets, sell essential infrastructure to private companies that charge a lot and make their donors rich. Fair enough! 

 

Then China engages in the opposite policies which makes them stronger, their businesses stronger and the West and their elite hate it of course. 

 

For the average labor worker, this should not be of any concern but the media sector manipulates everybody to believe this is their concern too although it again only affects less than 5% of the population. 

 

They can hit china with as much tariffs as they want but they will cut their life supply off since they factories are not in their home countries. Yes, maybe they can reestablish colonies in India or other SEA countries and maybe they will obey the US and don't develop themselves so that's maybe a bet. Still, China is already far enough to be self-sufficient in their own country and their partners are also very wealthy with resources. Russia did the right move, nothing to gain with Europe and US, better focus on China. It will be interesting how India will behave, the best would be to stay very neutral and take the best of both worlds while driving their own high-quality development. 

 

Very interesting times, Xi is right to say that there are changes happening not seen in 100 years: 

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/22/xi-tells-putin-of-changes-not-seen-for-100

 

 

 

[Luke]

Interestingly, Putin was also not the neoliberal subservient cog the Russian and US oligarchs thought he would be, he has the russian billionaires under tight control and they are afraid of him, we will see what happens with russia but I wouldn't count them out, especially now with close ties to China. Maybe with china they can accelerate a new form of growth too the coming decades although putin is getting old and maybe after the new guy is up they reorientate themselves, US will 100% follow that closely and fund US supportive governments there as we all know.