Investor confidence in China’s troubled property sector has been rocked again this week by reports that one of the country’s largest private building conglomerates missed interest payments on two bonds.
Investor confidence in China’s troubled property sector has been rocked again this week by reports that one of the country’s largest private building conglomerates missed interest payments on two bonds.
The numbers will sink in the next 20 years for pretty much all “developed” OECD countries. Including the US, UK, France, Germany… yet how often do you personally write about that problem? When even people like professor Reich of Berkeley mention the 40(?) trillion $ wealth transfer due to shrinking population and that mostly to a small group of population with reduced demand for housing you seem to focus a lot on a country you are not living in.
Do I think China faces challenges? Surely. Do I think the capitalist market oriented parts of it will lead to problems that are integral to capitalist market systems? Sure. The CPC has much more power to act on it though. China is currently able to house its population much better than 30 years ago after the crisis of the fall of the Soviet Union. Germany’s capital is missing 600k affordable flats at the same time.
Lets see how things will play out, but similar articles were published every couple of months for the last 20 something years. That generates sentiment.
The difference between those OECD countries is that they allow migration. Nationalistic and racist temper tantrums notwithstanding, those countries are bolstering their working age ranks with migrants. China is distinctly anti-migration. So they’ve been digging a giant hole that’s going to take a LOT to fill. And they haven’t even stopped digging yet (first rule of getting out of a hole!)
So, could China change that stance as a way to mitigate the issue? Sure. But they better up their human rights record or they are only going to attract the most desperate of migrant with no other options. That doesn’t bode well for a strong economic engine. Though cheap exploitable labor does help [shrug]
The numbers will sink in the next 20 years for pretty much all “developed” OECD countries. Including the US, UK, France, Germany… yet how often do you personally write about that problem? When even people like professor Reich of Berkeley mention the 40(?) trillion $ wealth transfer due to shrinking population and that mostly to a small group of population with reduced demand for housing you seem to focus a lot on a country you are not living in.
Do I think China faces challenges? Surely. Do I think the capitalist market oriented parts of it will lead to problems that are integral to capitalist market systems? Sure. The CPC has much more power to act on it though. China is currently able to house its population much better than 30 years ago after the crisis of the fall of the Soviet Union. Germany’s capital is missing 600k affordable flats at the same time.
Lets see how things will play out, but similar articles were published every couple of months for the last 20 something years. That generates sentiment.
The difference between those OECD countries is that they allow migration. Nationalistic and racist temper tantrums notwithstanding, those countries are bolstering their working age ranks with migrants. China is distinctly anti-migration. So they’ve been digging a giant hole that’s going to take a LOT to fill. And they haven’t even stopped digging yet (first rule of getting out of a hole!)
So, could China change that stance as a way to mitigate the issue? Sure. But they better up their human rights record or they are only going to attract the most desperate of migrant with no other options. That doesn’t bode well for a strong economic engine. Though cheap exploitable labor does help [shrug]