Index Investing News
Sunday, May 25, 2025
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • Home
  • World
  • Investing
  • Financial
  • Economy
  • Markets
  • Stocks
  • Crypto
  • Property
  • Sport
  • Entertainment
  • Opinion
  • Home
  • World
  • Investing
  • Financial
  • Economy
  • Markets
  • Stocks
  • Crypto
  • Property
  • Sport
  • Entertainment
  • Opinion
No Result
View All Result
Index Investing News
No Result
View All Result

The confusing China debate – Econlib

by Index Investing News
September 4, 2023
in Economy
Reading Time: 5 mins read
A A
0
Home Economy
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter


Tyler Cowen has a good post on the debate over China’s economic policy, which links to a recent WSJ article on the topic. I’ve noticed that when people debate this issue, they tend to talk past each other. This is because people throw around phrases like “more consumption”, without clearly indicating what they are talking about. Regarding China’s economy, here are some issues to consider:

1. Nominal demand vs. real demand.
2. Fiscal policy vs. monetary policy.
3. Consumption vs. investment.
4. Private investment vs. public investment.

I cannot emphasize enough that each of these four issues is radically different from the other three. Let me first describe what I think China needs, and then discuss the WSJ article:

1. China needs steady growth in nominal demand (NGDP.)
2. China needs to rely on monetary policy, and should not use fiscal policy for stabilization purposes.
3. China should let the market determine the relative size of consumption and investment.
4. China should reduce the role of the government in investment.

With this framework in mind, lots of confusing issues raised in the WSJ article begin to make more sense:

Economists and investors have been calling on Beijing to make bolder efforts to boost output—especially by promoting consumer spending, if necessary, by offering cash handouts, as the U.S. did during the pandemic.

Accelerating China’s transition to a more consumer-led economy—such as that of the U.S.—would make growth more sustainable in the long term, economists say.

But top leader Xi Jinping has deep-rooted philosophical objections to Western-style consumption-driven growth, people familiar with decision-making in Beijing say. Xi sees such growth as wasteful and at odds with his goal of making China a world-leading industrial and technological powerhouse, they say.

Xi believes Beijing should stick to fiscal discipline, especially given China’s deep debt. That makes stimulus or welfare policies akin to those in the U.S. and Europe less likely, the people said.

Notice that the WSJ frames this as welfarism vs. austerity.  So which view is right?  I’d say neither.  Xi’s right that welfarism is not right for China, and the economists are right that China needs stimulus.

So if there is to be no fiscal boost to consumption, and yet demand must increase, does that mean I favor more government investment?  No.  I favor monetary stimulus to boost NGDP.

This is where the Keynesian framing is so counterproductive: 

GDP = C + I + G + NX. 

This framing tempts economists to want to play God, to wave a magic wand and determine how much of GDP will be C, how much will be I and how much will be G.  The government clearly determines G.  But the government should not be determining the mix of consumption and investment.  No policymaker could realistically have the information required to make that judgment.

Take a second look at this:

Accelerating China’s transition to a more consumer-led economy—such as that of the U.S.—would make growth more sustainable in the long term, economists say.

How can we make sense of this claim, which on the surface seems bizarre?  For growth to be sustainable, you need investment.  And yet these western experts are not fools; they must have some sort of valid argument for this claim.

I suspect the actual claim here is that China needs to stop its extremely wasteful investment in certain areas, in order to avoid ending up with lots of “white elephants” and a mountain of unsustainable debts.  In a healthy economy, only productive investments are undertaken.  The current level of China’s investment as a share of GDP seems higher than can be justified by the low rates of return experienced in recent years:

Investment in roads, factories and other hard assets to drive growth has been yielding diminishing returns as the government runs out of useful projects to build.

Rather that say,”China needs more consumption”, I’d argue that China needs less wasteful investment.  Aren’t those the same thing?  Not really:

Also unlikely are major market-oriented changes, or a dramatic reversal in the multiyear shift toward more centralized control of the economy. Although Beijing has eased off efforts to clamp down on consumer internet firms and other private companies—a campaign that led to weaker private investment—it remains skeptical of their unregulated expansion. . . .

More likely options now include greater spending on infrastructure and other government-favored projects, as well as further credit loosening—following several recent interest-rate cuts—economists and people familiar with Beijing’s thinking say.

Such moves reflect Beijing’s preference for having the government play the central role in goosing growth, either by investing in infrastructure or by channeling funds to selected sectors such as semiconductors and artificial intelligence that can advance Communist Party aims.

The Chinese government has been discouraging private investment and encouraging public investment (as well as quasi-public investment, as in real estate and favored tech sectors.)  That’s a mistake.

For many western economists, “stimulus” is synonymous with fiscal stimulus, whereas stimulus should be done by the central bank.  And monetary stimulus is viewed as being synonymous with low interest rates and more investment, whereas the term ‘monetary stimulus’ should mean more nominal GDP—which might be either consumption or investment.

Some might argue that my analysis is naive because China is far from being a laissez-faire economy.  Monetary stimulus won’t necessarily go into the most efficient sectors.  I agree.  I am describing the sort of outcome that China should be aiming for.  Determining which policy levers to push requires an in depth knowledge of the current policy distortions that lead to a misallocation of resources.  Thus monetary stimulus might be combined with banking reform to reduce moral hazard.  The goal would be to reduce lending for nonproductive investments, such as dubious real estate projects.  But again, that’s not aiming for “less investment”, that’s aiming for less wasteful investment. 

I am not suggesting that public investment should be zero.  By all means continue doing public investments that pass cost/benefit tests.  But that will not include more bridges in Guizhou province, an area that is already absurdly overbuilt.  (And many “public investments” could be done by the private sector—look at Hong Kong’s excellent subway system.)

To summarize, much of the debate conflates unrelated concepts.  Pundits conflate nominal demand and real demand.  They conflate monetary and fiscal stimulus.  They conflate public and private investment.  They conflate consumption with aggregate demand.

Sorry, but “More consumption!” and “More investment!” are meaningless slogans.  The real issues are using monetary policy to assure nominal stability, and moving to a more market oriented economy to insure economic growth and higher living standards for the future.

If you want a simple slogan, here’s something that all sides should be able to agree upon:

More Chinese consumption in the year 2040!!

PS.  Here’s China Daily:

Guizhou is home to 49 of the 100 tallest bridges in the world, including four of the 10 tallest, the commission said. Four bridges in the province have won the Gustav Lindenthal Medal, one of the most prestigious bridge construction awards in the world.

Check out the link.  They sure built some beautiful white elephants in Guizhou province, a poor mountainous backwater in China’s interior.  Imagine being told that West Virginia had 49 of the world’s 100 highest bridges.  Might you suspect a bit of pork barrel politics?

 

 



Source link

Tags: ChinaconfusingDebateEconlib
ShareTweetShareShare
Previous Post

The Real Estate “Red Pill” That Made Me $400K/Year

Next Post

How the War in Ukraine is Driving a New Global Order

Related Posts

Donald Trump makes dangerous guess by rekindling his commerce conflict with the EU

Donald Trump makes dangerous guess by rekindling his commerce conflict with the EU

by Index Investing News
May 24, 2025
0

Donald Trump likes to make offers. And he could also be calculating that his sudden escalation of tariffs on the...

The Fed’s not making a revenue

The Fed’s not making a revenue

by Index Investing News
May 24, 2025
0

Unlock the Editor’s Digest free of chargeRoula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favorite tales on this weekly publication.The...

Trump’s subsequent 100 days

Trump’s subsequent 100 days

by Index Investing News
May 24, 2025
0

This week, Swamp Notes goes to London for a dwell recording. Katie Martin, host of the Unhedged podcast, and Chris...

Greenback notches greatest weekly drop since tariffs sell-off over US debt fears

Greenback notches greatest weekly drop since tariffs sell-off over US debt fears

by Index Investing News
May 24, 2025
0

Unlock the Editor’s Digest totally freeRoula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favorite tales on this weekly e-newsletter.Investor jitters...

Donald Trump ‘not in search of deal’ as he threatens EU with 50% tariff

Donald Trump ‘not in search of deal’ as he threatens EU with 50% tariff

by Index Investing News
May 24, 2025
0

Unlock the White Home Watch publication without spending a dimeYour information to what Trump’s second time period means for Washington,...

Next Post
How the War in Ukraine is Driving a New Global Order

How the War in Ukraine is Driving a New Global Order

Over a dozen arrested in Cyprus as anti-migrant violence spreads | Migration News

Over a dozen arrested in Cyprus as anti-migrant violence spreads | Migration News

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

RECOMMENDED

Romanian courtroom upholds presidential election first-round outcomes | Courts Information

Romanian courtroom upholds presidential election first-round outcomes | Courts Information

December 2, 2024
Is TikTok Coming Again? How you can Use the App within the U.S. After the Ban – Hollywood Life

Is TikTok Coming Again? How you can Use the App within the U.S. After the Ban – Hollywood Life

January 19, 2025
Jamie Dimon says American dream is disappearing

Jamie Dimon says American dream is disappearing

August 5, 2024
How I’m Discovering Worthwhile Properties in 2025 (Shotgun Technique)

How I’m Discovering Worthwhile Properties in 2025 (Shotgun Technique)

April 2, 2025
Amazon to replace Walgreens Boots Alliance in Dow By Investing.com

Amazon to replace Walgreens Boots Alliance in Dow By Investing.com

February 20, 2024
BTC, ETH Move Lower on Thursday, After Hawkish Fed Rate Hike – Market Updates Bitcoin News

BTC, ETH Move Lower on Thursday, After Hawkish Fed Rate Hike – Market Updates Bitcoin News

November 3, 2022
Our political economy works like a multi-player game

Our political economy works like a multi-player game

August 2, 2023
Taking Risk No Longer Necessary. But That Is A Problem…

Taking Risk No Longer Necessary. But That Is A Problem…

May 2, 2023
Index Investing News

Get the latest news and follow the coverage of Investing, World News, Stocks, Market Analysis, Business & Financial News, and more from the top trusted sources.

  • 1717575246.7
  • Browse the latest news about investing and more
  • Contact us
  • Cookie Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • DMCA
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • xtw18387b488

Copyright © 2022 - Index Investing News.
Index Investing News is not responsible for the content of external sites.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • World
  • Investing
  • Financial
  • Economy
  • Markets
  • Stocks
  • Crypto
  • Property
  • Sport
  • Entertainment
  • Opinion

Copyright © 2022 - Index Investing News.
Index Investing News is not responsible for the content of external sites.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In