Talk:Economy of China/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Need to update China vs World by Nominal GDP per capita for 2021

The images for China vs World by Nominal GDP per capita in 2020 need to be updated for 2021 because the images still showing for 2020. 36.68.218.31 (talk) 09:31, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Recent debt:GDP edit.

China’s central government debt was 68% of GDP in 2021, according to the IMF. This 270 % figure has no bearing on what is normally thought of as debt-to-GDP. DOR (HK) (talk) 12:35, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

The Lead - 2022

For many years, people have commented on the extreme length of the lead. It seems like time to cut it down. Does anyone have strong opinions on this? JArthur1984 (talk) 20:47, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Recent updates

Could we please wait until the end of a period of time before stating what the economic numbers might some day be? The year isn't even over, and most certainly the State Statistical Bureau has not released even an estimate for the full year's GDP figures, but some people just have to jump the gun ... DOR (HK) (talk) 14:15, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Once again: we have no idea what 2022 GDP will be, so it is unencyclopedic to pretend we do. Yes, there are highly respected institutions that conveniently produce figures that may well be a good guess. Given that those guesses were pretty poor in the last two years, and that there are scant few reasons why anyone who needs a 2022 figure would look to Wikipedia, can we please just leave historic numbers -- updated, when needed! -- as the most recently factually accurate data? DOR (HK) (talk) 19:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Announcement of the National Bureau of statistics on the Final Verification of GDP in 2021. Stop undoing the edit. DOR (HK) (talk) 14:15, 27 December 2021 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.1.129.207 (talk) 20:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

You need to provide a proper citation, see WP:REFB; an edit summary isn't the right place to give the source. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:42, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Totally Misleading Content

GDP figures for this article are completely misleading and unverifiable. China's economy is NOT the biggest economy in the world by nominal GDP and is not expected to be until the 2030s and even that is now in doubt. At most, China's nominal GDP is $20 trillion or slightly higher and is expected to contract in 2023. Please correct this page if you want to maintain credibility! 2604:CA00:15B:31D:0:0:69:1CF9 (talk) 20:00, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

English

Economic of China 117.20.115.12 (talk) 03:40, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Interpretation of economic literature in "overestimating" and "underestimating" sections.

I find it strange that the "underestimating" section contains a paper by Hunter Clarka, Maxim Pinkovskiya and Xavier Sala-i-Martin, while more recent papers (For example by Martinez in 2021) conclude that China's growth is systematically overstated by a similar light-brightness metric. It would be useful to find a meta-study which compares findings across the literature if at all possible. As of now, the article reads like two undergrads hastily googling whatever they can find. 38.42.234.203 (talk) 22:34, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Services

The section on services is either incorrect or misleadingly written. Apparently, "In 2015 the services sector produced 52.9% of China's annual GDP, second only to manufacturing." This seems to me like a contradiction, as if its over 50%, there's no way manufacturing is still bigger. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.111.29.248 (talk) 16:30, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

What source used for GDP?

I am assuming we should just use the IMF's WEO database for the GDP of China, both nominally and Purchasing Power Parity basis? I just saw someone change the GDP without changing the source in regards to GDP, basing off the National Bureau of Statistics of China. Are we supposed to use the most up to date source, or a source like IMF? Just wondering. China has been known to underestimate/overestimate their own economy, we have a whole section of Western academics and institutions talking about this. I don't want to change it back in case we are allowed to do this, so I just thought I would ask. Thanks. ZachL111 (talk) 07:08, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

With the very few exceptions of extremely underdeveloped economies, the IMF does not estimate recent (historic) GDP. Rather, it uses official sources. Bear in mind that this is good old fashioned nominal GDP in local currency terms as produced by the national statistical authorities. What happens after that – market exchange rate valuations or purchasing power parity – is unrelated to the base figure as generated by the national statistical authorities. To put it another way, the national statistical authorities are the sole legitimate source of most of the world's GDP economic. The IMF just collects these numbers (quite slowly), and so can only be considered a secondary source. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 15:19, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Late reply, fair enough. I was more concerned on which source we use, it seems like what you said is most accurate. Yeah, the IMF seems to aggregate all of the NBS equivelants across the world. ZachL111 (talk) 06:46, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: LLIB 1115 - Intro to Information Research

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 8 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): HyrumGriff (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by HyrumGriff (talk) 17:30, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Classification of China's economy as 'High-Income'

The GDP per capita figure suggests that China's economy could be classified as high income next year, but is it not too early to call it high income now? Any thoughts on this? OrientalTraveller (talk) 14:38, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Too early. WP:crystalball. But good to keep a note of IMO. JArthur1984 (talk) 15:27, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Some Chinese top tier cities may be classed as high income but not the lower tier cities or the countryside. Former Chinese Premier Li Keqiang stated that there are 600 million Chinese living on 1,000 yuan or less a month. That converts to under $150 a month and is solidly at a Third World level. My rule of thumb is any country with an average income under $5,000 per person per year is Third World (low income). $5-20,000 is Second World (middle income) and over $20,000 is First World (high income). For comparison the US is around $80,000 per person, so $20,000 is probably on the low side. Anyway, $20,000 per person time 1.4 billion people gives a GDP of $28 trillion. China would have to double it's current GDP to be classed as a First World (high income) nation. With China's real estate crash putting a crimp on Chinese growth, don't hold your breath! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.26.243.70 (talk) 19:32, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

This article IS THREE TIMES LONGER than the US economy article

China's economy is considerably more complex to understand than the US economy, the size of the country, the diversity in development, the population, the workforce, the complex relations between state and private all argue for an article longer than that for the USA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chinareporter (talk • contribs) 09:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Whether or not China's economy is more complex than the US Economy is beside the question. This is a very poorly edited article. Whereas the review of the US or most other economies chooses to deal with Agriculture, the Steel Industry, Tourism, or the Automotive industry by directing the reader to a sub-article link, this main article includes a full description of the subject with a novella. This makes the main article bulky. This is silly. There is no justification for this article being this long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.240.150.52 (talk) 05:38, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

You people should be ashamed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.219.235.234 (talk) 19:04, 5 April 2009 (UTC) 'Bold text

Maybe they just don't have time to edit. Rainn1993 (talk) 17:12, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Think of the saying "Designed by a committee".

The number of this committee is the total number of people that have edited this article to toss in their 2 bits, or to prevent someone from tossing in their 2 bits. 108.26.243.70 (talk) 20:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Chart on discontinued data sets - add or not??

The following FT article contains a chart of the number of date sets issued by China. Assuming it is not a copyright infringement, it would be a nice addition to the article.

https://www.ft.com/content/43bea201-ff6c-4d94-8506-e58ff787802c

https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/ftcms%3A05b134e8-0a85-42d5-9deb-f15de2c266a1?source=next-article&fit=scale-down&quality=highest&width=700&dpr=2 108.26.243.70 (talk) 16:56, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Propaganda/unreliable statistics and real estate crash/banking crisis

There needs to be a section reporting that Chinese statistics are propaganda/or just plain old unreliable and another on the impact of the Chinese real estate crash on the economy and banking system. The section on demographics needs to be expanded to include recent birth data.

Independent analysts who have tried to determine the size of China's economy say that it is somewhere around 1/2 to 2/3rds the size that China claims it to be. These studies are bases on travel statistics, electricity usage, city luminosity and other factors. Many of them also say that China is currently in either a deep recession or a depression (an economic contraction of over 20%) because of the real estate crash.

Peter Zeihan for instance states, in an over the top fashion, that "This is China's last generation" based on demographics. China currently reports around 9 million births a year. Assuming a life expectancy of 75 years that implies a population of 675 billion, which is less than half the claimed current population of China. That birth rate has been dropping for years and is now roughly half the replacement level. With the current tough economic times, it will most likely keep dropping as marriage rates continue to drop drop due to a lack of earning power to raise a family. China also has the issue of the selective abortion of females, and a resulting preponderance of males in the population, who can't give birth. Unlike other nations which need 2.1 births per female to have a stable population, Chinese women need to give births at a higher rate for a stable population. Probably around 2.5. A further drop in the birth rate implies that the population of China will drop quite a bit below 675 million over the next century and based on these trends, that the US population will overtake that of China's sometime in the next century.

In this Zeihan presentation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UA-jOLF2T4c starting around the 53:30 minute mark, Zeihan claims that the Chinese population is already over counted by 100 million and that by 2050 the Chinese may lose another 600 million people, dropping to around 700 million.

Is China in a Depression or just a recession?? Nobody really knows as China fudges so many of its economic statistics. The condition of the real estate sector strongly implies that it is in either in a deep recession (over 10% drop) or a depression (over a 20% drop). Most sources states that prior to the real estate crash, this sector was around 30% of the Chinese economy. With most of the sector in a standstill it is likely that this sector is now around 10% of the total economy, dropping from 30% to a around 10%. In other words 20% of the Chinese economy has vanished and the Chinese economy has therefore contracted. This sector is unlikely to recover because of its huge debt levels and overbuilding. Evegrande, the real estate developer which is the worst off financially, owes around $340 billion to banks, bondholders, former workers and subcontractors. It has also failed to complete something like 1 million housing units, which have already been paid for. These units will cost further $100's of billions to complete, meaning that the company is more like $5-600 billion in the hole. For comparison, it's sale volume peaked at just over $100 billion a year

Of "what used to be" the 3 largest Chinese real estate developers, 2 of them, County Garden and Evergrande, are bankrupt, and the third, Vanke, is in serious trouble. This is "slap your face" evidence that Chinese real estate is in a massive contraction. Vanke used to be the smallest of the top 3.

A section on China's banking problems would also be desirable. China's real estate firms have taken out a lot of debt which they now can't repay. Much of this was to Chinese banks and money management firms. These firms now have a hole in their balance sheet that is in the trillions of dollars, and this hole is becoming increasingly visible as banking/investment groups either fold or refuse to give depositors their money.

Zhongrong Trust, a money manager with around $500 billion under management recently declared that it is "severely insolvent", is $37 billion in the hole and cannot make payments. Wanxiang Trust is reportedly in trouble as well, having missed payments. 108.26.243.70 (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

This is an article about the Economy of China, not about Speculation on the Future of China’s Economy. And, YouTube is entertainment, and not a reliable source. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 16:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

So if the president of the US makes a speech and it is shown on YouTube by CNN on the CNN channel you can't quote from it??? but you can when the speech is shown on the CNN website???

Sounds fishy!

The source is who produced the content, not the place where it is shown.

And I disagree on the other part as well, a section on speculation on the future of China's economy would not be out of place in the article. 108.26.243.70 (talk) 18:44, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

On Speculation about the future, the article already contains material that can be considered that. It only took me a few minutes to find this "speculation". "In 2023, IMF predicted China to continue being one of the fastest growing major economies.[88]". If a favorable IMF prediction can be included, I don't see a reason why an unfavorable one from another authoritative/reputable source saying the opposite can't be. Considering the collapse of China's real estate sector, which per most sources used to make up around 30% of China's economy, it is highly likely that China's is facing a dim economic future, same as when Japan's real estate market collapsed decades ago. Japan has yet to recover from that collapse. By all sources, Chinese overbuilding is much worse that Japanese overbuilding and the collapse will likely be much worse. Stories are now coming out that China has built, or is in the process of building, enough apartments to house 3 billion people, or twice the population of China. One source claimed that the Chinese did a survey on the number of residential buildings and found 600 million of them. That means an average number of inhabitants per building of 2.3 people. That include a hovel in the countryside, a mansion, or a 20 floor apartment building in a major city. There is no way this will end well. That is as certain as predicting that a piano falling off of the roof of a 20 story building will soon be only useful as firewood.108.26.243.70 (talk) 20:41, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Please learn about the difference between an official forecast by the global leader in multinational economic analysis, and speculation. Oh, and perhaps maybe -- just maybe -- something that is reproduced on YouTube should be sourced from the original? Just a thought. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 18:42, 18 December 2023 (UTC)