Here's a simple math question for you - China spent 600 billion to stimulate growth from 6.1% last quarter to 7.9% this quarter. China has 2 trillion in USD savings in their central bank. How much more money does China have to stimulate their economy, as they can no longer rely on export markets to consume their goods, and must keep stimulating domestic citizens to buy?
Oh my China, I love you tooooooooo much And you USA, nasty, nasty, nasty. Learn from China, I say LEARN FROM CHINA - they are the new masters.
your argument AGAIN is wrong. China does not emulate American stimulus packages that aim to work for the next quarter. The stimulus China has thrown out was aimed a) to calm the nerves of some part of the population (which worked less than expected) and b) to stick to the plan to continuously support a rising living standard for the working middle class. This you can read on webpages and numerous papers put out by government think tanks, the de-facto way of the government to communicate their stance towards domestic policies. You may need someone to translate into English in case you dont know Chinese.
The U.S. stimulus package was never designed to work for "precisely one quarter" (I'm paraphrasing your ridiculous insinuation). You are quite disingenuous in your contentions and debating tactics. The general point is that once a stimulus package trickles out, whether here, or in China, its going to have diminishing returns over a longer period of time. In the case of China, which depends (with or without stimulus money to stimulate domestic consumption; just a matter of degree) on exports to carry its economy, unless additional stimulus monies are used to increase domestic consumption, the initial package is going to ultimately wane in its intended effects.
"Unprecedented Difficulties' in Attracting Foreign Investment" I have not read all this thread but foreign investment is flowing into China as we speak. Firstly at the expense of Europe followed from a distance by US sosueme
Of course was the US program intended to work short-term. Otherwise why would you throw billions of dollars at deadbeats such as GM, Ford, Crysler, AIG, Citi, BoA? It was to avert immediate disaster. If those companies were not on the verge of bankruptcy then there would have been no point in injecting your childrens' future into them, correct? The point about China that you are simply too stubborn to see (maybe because you were brainwashed after having read a single bearish China writeup) is that whatever happens to the U.S. China is not gonna go down. Obviously all of China's investments in the U.S. will be lost, and U.S. demand for China's products would disappear as well. So what? A lot lower growth rate, BUT, and that is what you seem to be brainwashed about, China is only shipping a part of its finished products to the US. THere are tons of other markets (and I showed facts earlier on that most of those other markets are by now more important to China than the U.S.) which will enable China to move ahead, albeit at reduced speed. So, again, what is your REAL argument against above points? Something I dont understand is how on average a lot of Americans (more so than other nations) cannot get this naive pride out of their head that the world will stop functioning without a striving U.S. The argument of total supremacy was maybe justified until 20 years ago but the world has really changed. The U.S. has basically enacted a trade: It gave up its supremacy for more balanced responsibilities. Admittedly the rest of the world has not yet fully delivered on their fair share of added responsibilities. Simple fact is China has a comparitive advantage in manufacturing goods and it will not lose that whethere there is a country called America or not. That was my whole point and nothing more, nothing less. Can we not settle this whole naive discussion by admitting we are all a lot less important than we want to think?
So your sources for that asshole attitude of yours is nothing more than chinese government reports? And think tanks? Wow, what a joke.
Came back from a visit to China three weeks ago. From what I saw and what was told by friends, the stimulus package is really having a big impact in China, whereas in US it is still missing-in-action. Will the stimulus last? No one knows for sure, as it depends on also many other factors.
...read carefully...I said the sources in order to know about the intended use of the stimulus package are reports pumped out by think tanks. I never mentioned I believed any economic numbers reported by any government. And what are your sources and contributions?
good points. But after all the stimulus packages will be forgotten in history, in the US as well as in China or elsewhere. Economic government intervention will have a very small impact on the real underlying forces. Point is that China's growth will not be stopped nor pushed up by a lot no matter how large or small the stimulus packages. Why I responded to an earlier post in regards to the stimulus package was because I think the way it was structured in China is way better and has longer term effects than the one in the U.S.