• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

China's Economy: Behind all the hype (BusinessWeek)

GoFlyKiteNow

Alfrescian
Loyal
China's Economy: Behind all the hype
23 Oct 2009, 1605 hrs BusinessWeek
By Dexter Roberts and Pete Engardio

At the parade marking the 60th anniversary of the People's Republic of China, tanks and missiles trundled past the Forbidden City and down Beijing's Chang'an Avenue. Battalions of soldiers goose-stepped in perfect unison. Overhead, fighter jets soared in tight formation.

But delve beneath the muscular statistics and hype about advances in strategic industries, and China doesn't seem so prepared to catapult into a role of global economic leadership. Experts familiar with highly touted Chinese achievements such as commercial jets and high-speed trains say the technologies that underpin them were largely developed elsewhere.

There is no Chinese Sony, Toyota, or Samsung on the horizon. While Beijing's $586 billion stimulus package and a 150% increase in bank lending have spurred impressive growth, "the question," says Morgan Stanley (MS) Asia Chairman Stephen S. Roach, "is the quality of that growth."

By Beijing's own admission, the economic model that has powered China for three decades can no longer be counted on to move it forward. The mainland has prospered largely through construction and by exporting all manner of consumer goods churned out in low-wage factories; workers parked their savings in state-run banks, which then loaned the money to companies to make more stuff.

But technology and managerial knowhow came mostly from multinationals, and the costs—pollution, decaying social services, and a yawning gap between the urban rich and rural poor—were largely ignored. Though that model has fueled phenomenal growth, Hu and others now call it "unbalanced" and "unsustainable."


As President Barack Obama prepares for his first state visit to the mainland on Nov. 15 though, some economists are taking a skeptical look at China's evolution. While Beijing has honored many of the market-opening commitments it made to join the World Trade Organization in 2001, promised reforms such as allowing greater foreign investment in telecommunications and financial services have stalled.

Over the past three years a steady stream of directives flowing from a raft of ministries and the National Development & Reform Commission—successor to the old central planning agency—have tightened the state's grip on the economy. In June, for example, the commission ordered that wherever possible only goods made by Chinese-owned companies be used in any project funded by the government.

For a glimpse of what may lie ahead if China fails to transform its economy, head to the southern city of Dongguan.

The thousands of factories in the Pearl River Delta industrial hub churn out televisions, furniture, toys, and a seemingly infinite number of other products for consumers worldwide. But with China's exports down 15% in September—the 11th consecutive month of decline—Dongguan is reeling. In the Changping district, once dubbed "little Hong Kong," shuttered factories are overgrown with weeds.

The karaoke bars and restaurants, which once catered to the thousands of Hong Kong and Taiwanese managers who have fled, are quiet. Sure, the economy of Guangdong Province is on track for 9% growth this year, but that's due mainly to massive government spending on public works, such as an airport expansion and a nuclear power station. "What Guangdong is facing, all of China is facing," says Wang Yiyang, vice-director of Guangdong's development research center, an arm of the provincial government. "We have to find new sources of competitiveness."

NO INCUBATOR OF INNOVATION

China has a long way to go, though, in innovation. The mainland has dramatically boosted research spending and boasts the world's biggest pool of science and engineering graduates. But aside from Internet games, the country creates few breakthrough products, due in no small measure to the perennial problem of rampant counterfeiting.

China last year exported $416 billion worth of high-tech goods. But subtract the mainland operations of Taiwanese contract manufacturers and the likes of Nokia (NOK), Samsung, and Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), and China is an electronics lightweight.

Beyond Tsingtao beer and low-end Haier refrigerators, "China has zilch brand presence in the U.S.," says Kenneth J. DeWoskin, director of the China Research & Insight Center at Deloitte & Touche.

Instead, most mainland companies mine existing technologies and compete on high volume and low cost in commodity goods.

WESTERN TECHNOLOGY INSIDE

Disassemble other widely hailed successes of indigenous innovation, and there is little Chinese about them. Beijing has long craved its own commercial aircraft industry, and its first offering—a 90-seat commuter jet dubbed the ARJ21—is to hit the market next year. Next up is the C919, a midrange plane with up to 190 seats that state-owned Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China unveiled on Sept. 9. The airliner, scheduled for delivery in 2016, is intended as a direct challenge to Boeing and Airbus.

Western experts familiar with Comac's planes say they're based on older jets designed by McDonnell Douglas two decades ago, before the U.S. company was acquired by Boeing. The avionics, engine, and other key systems on the ARJ21, meanwhile, come from Western suppliers such as Honeywell, General Electric, and Rockwell Collins .

But it simply doesn't have the capabilities to develop these aircraft without Western technology." The prospect of Comac competing with Boeing and Airbus outside China even two decades from now, says Smith, "is a long shot." Comac declined interview requests.
 
Last edited:

longbow

Alfrescian
Loyal
Of course all the know how comes from foreigners because Chinese do not have the technology at the moment. It is far better to copy then to reinvent the wheel. The Chinese are at the moment learning how to make the stuff from the MNC and once they learn that they will be able to do it themselves. After all these MNC are hiring Chinese managers and workers and the billions in plant and equipment are sitting in China!

When VW makes their engine in China, the local supply chain learns how to produce the type of aluminium casting needed to meet VW goals. There is a lot of technology transfer and the Chinese can pry all that technology out of the MNCs because of their market. GM is selling its EU operations but yet they keep they Chinese operations. A lot of these factories are JV and some have Chinese majority.

So unlike the Japs, Chinese have the influence to demand technology transfer. And it really does not take long to know how to make a car or make a OLED screen.

Just look at the Koreans or even the Japs. They followed the same route. The Chinese started from a much lower base and they are on their way.

There will always be a yawning gap when you compare a factory worker in the city with a farmer. All economies that make a great leap from agriculture to manufacturing based economies will see a big gap in wealth. Even in the US today, the avg income of states with strong manuf and service sector is double or triple what it is in farming states. Moral of story is get out of farming!

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/10/22/india.farmers.selling.wives/index.html

There will be ups and down but the country is moving ahead and is leaving the many other 3rd world nation in its dust.

Tell me a 3rd world nation with strong brand presence in the US. BTW I think Lenovo is doing pretty well in the US I was there 6 months ago and most businesses were using Lenovo notebooks.
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
Of course all the know how comes from foreigners because Chinese do not have the technology at the moment. It is far better to copy then to reinvent the wheel. The Chinese are at the moment learning how to make the stuff from the MNC and once they learn that they will be able to do it themselves. After all these MNC are hiring Chinese managers and workers and the billions in plant and equipment are sitting in China!

Sinkies didn't learn a thing from the MNCs so what makes you think China will be any different?:rolleyes:

Singapore was transformed from backwater to economic "miracle" on the back of international MNC giants such as Rollei, TI, Natsemi, Seagate, Conner and Philips

Fast forward 30 years and Singapore has learnt absolutely nothing from the MNC lead technology transfers. The only company that comes close to being described as a home grown success is Creative tech and only because it launched on Nasdaq and not the SES.

In the vain struggle to keep the economy sputtering along, Sinkieland has resorted to prostituting itself to Bernie (F1), a bunch of shady gambling barons and daily planeloads of 3rd rate "talent" to boost the demand side of the equation.

China is no different. It doesn't have the talent or the national psyche needed to foster the creativity required for 21 century success. A nation of copycats simply doesn't have what it takes to foster talent capable of taking on the creative geniuses that thrive in Western democracies.
 

pallkia

Alfrescian
Loyal
Over the last 3 decades of China's opening to the World,so many writeups were talked on China's economy pitfalls with many fanciful sofisticated theories,but it seems that China is still growing stronger day by day.

It does not matter who owns what technologies,what it matters most is the Chinese standard of living is improving and working toward First World league!
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
Over the last 3 decades of China's opening to the World,so many writeups were talked on China's economy pitfalls with many fanciful sofisticated theories,but it seems that China is still growing stronger day by day.

It does not matter who owns what technologies,what it matters most is the Chinese standard of living is improving and working toward First World league!

China is described as "strong" because it has filled it's coffers by providing "slave" labour to manufacture products for the west. However, both Sinkieland and China will ultimately find that $$$ cannot sustain a nation over the long term. Without innovation, money runs out when the tap runs dry.
 

pallkia

Alfrescian
Loyal
China is described as "strong" because it has filled it's coffers by providing "slave" labour to manufacture products for the west. However, both Sinkieland and China will ultimately find that $$$ cannot sustain a nation over the long term. Without innovation, money runs out when the tap runs dry.

Russia used to be very innovative in Science and Technology,but now they are not as influencial as before.........................

But China is going very soon to be number 2 economic power in the World.I would say the Chinese are working smart and not hard in attaining the standard of the Rich industrialised Countries.Go visit China and see for yourselves..........................
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
Chinese are working smart and not hard in attaining the standard of the Rich industrialised Countries.Go visit China and see for yourselves..........................

All I see is a facade constructed from imported technology bought with money earned from exploiting its people.

China is very similar to Singapore.... a fancy front that hides deep seated rot.
 

Jah_rastafar_I

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
All I see is a facade constructed from imported technology bought with money earned from exploiting its people.

China is very similar to Singapore.... a fancy front that hides deep seated rot.



COntinue with your biasness. You'll always give a negative view no matter what.
 
Top