China is in a rapid and geo-politically dangerous economic decline.

[Lord Tammerlain]

The acceleration of the rate of the aging in China is much higher than in any of those countries.

In 5 years, no country will be aging faster than China.

The economy of china relies on working aged people more than any of the countries you listed.

No one is saying that China is going to collapse in 5 years.

There isn't any way out of what is coming though. They were late in addressing the demographics problem, now they won't be able to avoid a disruption.

The bigger your population is, the more disruptive an aging population is.

Chins is installing huge numbers of industrial robots. It has the largest number in the world installed and is if i recall correctly the 5th most per capita. It is automating the ports it has and will not need anywhere close to the number of workers to power its industrial output as it did in the past. It is moving up the value chain in manufacturing, which is why the US is now scared.

It will allow more fillipino workers to care for the elderly than Japan or Korea will. If the fillipino workers stay and assimilate culturally they will be accepted as being Chinese, while in Japan or Korea they will not be accepted as Japanese or Korean,

See what happened to ethnic Japanese who moved to Japan from Brazil

 

[Surrealistik]

Compared to Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Philippines, Laos it is much better

It is also more accepting of various ethnic groups than Japan or Korea arep

Doubtful, especially as the xenophobic older generations continue to pass away and lose influence.

While China may have living standards that are somewhat more attractive than those still-developing/emerging countries you mentioned that also have net negative migration rates (I should hope), I'm not sure whether that compensates for its rampant pollution, especially draconian government and loss of freedoms. Beyond this of course, it's not like China is competing with them for immigrants; it's competing with the infinitely more attractive West and other developed nations that almost universally have positive immigration rates because people actually want to live and work there; as a point of fact, they'll die trying.

Robots are also not a particularly compelling remedy; it'll buy China more time at best, but countries that have far more pervasive automation such as Japan, still suffer from persistent and potentially existential demography issues, and theirs is easier to rectify than China's.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Doubtful, especially as the xenophobic older generations continue to pass away and lose influence.

While China may have living standards that are somewhat more attractive than those still-developing/emerging countries you mentioned that also have net negative migration rates (I should hope), I'm not sure whether that compensates for its rampant pollution, especially draconian government and loss of freedoms. Beyond this of course, it's not like China is competing with them for immigrants; it's competing with the infinitely more attractive West and other developed nations that almost universally have positive immigration rates because people actually want to live and work there; as a point of fact, they'll die trying.

Robots are also not a particularly compelling remedy; it'll buy China more time at best, but countries that have far more pervasive automation such as Japan, still suffer from persistent and potentially existential demography issues, and theirs is easier to rectify than China's.

China domestically has adopted high tech far more than Japan. Japan still uses fax machines for a lot of business processes.

China is automating anything and everything possible. It's ports are the most advanced, it is automating mines, it is using 5G in factories to allow for remote viewing, improved quality control. The idea that China at least the east coast is still a back water is a false idea.

Robots are a hugely compelling replacement for a significant number of workers. The Tesla plant in Shanghai is heavily automated and is the most productive Tesla plant in the world. Low skilled basic labor would not be able to achieve that. Tesla would not need to bring the Shanghai workers to the US to teach US workers if they did not have the skill and knowledge Tesla US workers lacked

There is a reason it produces 30% of the world's manufactured good, and cheap unskilled labor is no longer one of them.

Canada is being economically stupid, bringing in lots of workers generally to fill low skilled positions. Our productivity is decreasing which also means our individual standard of living will decrease. We need more robots, to increase productivity, not more workers to put a jar in a box, bit workers who can fix the robots

 

[Surrealistik]

China domestically has adopted high tech far more than Japan. Japan still uses fax machines for a lot of business processes.

China is automating anything and everything possible. It's ports are the most advanced, it is automating mines, it is using 5G in factories to allow for remote viewing, improved quality control. The idea that China at least the east coast is still a back water is a false idea.

Robots are a hugely compelling replacement for a significant number of workers. The Tesla plant in Shanghai is heavily automated and is the most productive Tesla plant in the world. Low skilled basic labor would not be able to achieve that. Tesla would not need to bring the Shanghai workers to the US to teach US workers if they did not have the skill and knowledge Tesla US workers lacked

There is a reason it produces 30% of the world's manufactured good, and cheap unskilled labor is no longer one of them.

Canada is being economically stupid, bringing in lots of workers generally to fill low skilled positions. Our productivity is decreasing which also means our individual standard of living will decrease. We need more robots, to increase productivity, not more workers to put a jar in a box, bit workers who can fix the robots

Sorry, when it comes to robotics density, it ain't even close:

Worldwide: industrial robot density by region| Statista

In 2022, South Korea had the largest industrial robot density in the manufacturing industry with ***** installations per ****** employees.

www.statista.com

Again, South Korea, as you yourself pointed out, has ongoing demography problems despite having more than 4 times China's robotics density AND healthy, positive immigration. Japan for its part has nearly 50% more.

China is, as stated, unlikely to automate its way out of its problems, neither in terms of remaining cost competitive with increasingly cheaper alternative manufacturing countries, nor in terms of its demography issues.


As to Canada, nah, overwhelmingly Canadian immigrants are skilled and educated, with roughly 2/3rds having post secondary; more than the proportion of the native population in fact, with the intention of employing them accordingly. Where Canada falls short is in providing a proper pipeline to the skilled positions we admitted these people for.

As for productivity, aside from an anomalous spike, and despite very recent pullbacks, Canadian productivity is, as a whole and over the long run, increasing by and large according to trend (see 10 YR, 25 YR and max): https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/productivity

 

[ralfy]

In light of the Global South, this explains why several financiers argue that other countries, like the Philippines, India, Indonesia, and even several in Africa, will take over because of younger populations.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Sorry, when it comes to robotics density, it ain't even close:

Worldwide: industrial robot density by region| Statista

In 2022, South Korea had the largest industrial robot density in the manufacturing industry with ***** installations per ****** employees.

www.statista.com

Again, South Korea, as you yourself pointed out, has ongoing demography problems despite having more than 4 times China's robotics density AND healthy, positive immigration. Japan for its part has nearly 50% more.

China is, as stated, unlikely to automate its way out of its problems, neither in terms of remaining cost competitive with increasingly cheaper alternative manufacturing countries, nor in terms of its demography issues.


As to Canada, nah, overwhelmingly Canadian immigrants are skilled and educated, with roughly 2/3rds having post secondary; more than the proportion of the native population in fact, with the intention of employing them accordingly. Where Canada falls short is in providing a proper pipeline to the skilled positions we admitted these people for.

As for productivity, aside from an anomalous spike, and despite very recent pullbacks, Canadian productivity is, as a whole and over the long run, increasing by and large according to trend (see 10 YR, 25 YR and max): https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/productivity

Plenty of the immigrants Canada brings in, end up doing menial low-level positions. Certainly below what their education would indicate.

Last October I hired a PhD in Biology to work as a QC lab tech. Plenty of other resumes that I saw had BsC or masters all looking for work at a factory or as lower level lab techs.

Canada productivity

The low productivity of Canadian companies threatens our living standards

(Version française disponible ici) The causes of the low productivity of Canadian companies are well known and documented: they invest little, spend less on research and development than those in other rich countries, and have a low propensity to innovate. These behaviours tend to limit their...

policyoptions.irpp.org

Redirect Notice

You are correct, for robot density China is behind Korea and Japan, but it is increasing that density very fast.

China: Robot installations grew by 44 percent

The industrial robotics market in China achieved strong growth with a new record of 243,300 installations in 2021 – a rise of 44% compared to the previous year. These preliminary data have been published by the International Federation of Robotics.

ifr.org

China still has high potential for further growth,” said Marina Bill. “The country´s robot density in the manufacturing industry amounts to 246 industrial robots per 10,000 employees thus ranking ninth worldwide in 2020. Ten years ago, China´s robot density was 15 units only.”

 

[Surrealistik]

Plenty of the immigrants Canada brings in, end up doing menial low-level positions. Certainly below what their education would indicate.

Last October I hired a PhD in Biology to work as a QC lab tech. Plenty of other resumes that I saw had BsC or masters all looking for work at a factory or as lower level lab techs.

I don't disagree that talent gets misallocated; it's the pipeline that's the issue, but we aren't gathering people explicitly to fill menial tasks.

Canada productivity

The low productivity of Canadian companies threatens our living standards

(Version française disponible ici) The causes of the low productivity of Canadian companies are well known and documented: they invest little, spend less on research and development than those in other rich countries, and have a low propensity to innovate. These behaviours tend to limit their...

policyoptions.irpp.org

Redirect Notice

This is myopic alarmism.

The fact is that productivity is in line with a long term up trend despite recent pullbacks as stated, and as shown in the graph I've provided.

You are correct, for robot density China is behind Korea and Japan, but it is increasing that density very fast.

China: Robot installations grew by 44 percent

The industrial robotics market in China achieved strong growth with a new record of 243,300 installations in 2021 – a rise of 44% compared to the previous year. These preliminary data have been published by the International Federation of Robotics.

ifr.org

Again, if South Korea is still struggling with less severe long term demography problems as you yourself admitted, despite having positive net migration, and nearly 5 times China's present robotics density, it seems unlikely at best that robotics will ultimately prove to be a bullet proof panacea for these very serious problems.

 

[Hamish Howl]

What are you even arguing about at this point?

Compulsive contrarianism.

 

[Hamish Howl]

It isn’t. And if the Communist government orders the citizenry to start making babies then it will be so.

Oddly enough, this isn't happening.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

I don't disagree that talent gets misallocated; it's the pipeline that's the issue, but we aren't hiring people explicitly to fill menial tasks.


This is myopic alarmism.

The fact is that productivity is in line with a long term up trend despite recent pullbacks as stated, and as shown in the graph I've provided.


Again, if South Korean is still struggling with less severe long term demography problems as you yourself admitted, despite having positive net migration, and nearly 5 times China's present robotics density, it seems unlikely at best that robotics will ultimately prove to be a bullet proof panacea for these very serious problems.

China has 20 years before it becomes an issue,

In those 20 years, robot density will increase dramatically, it will also try various policies to increase birth rates, potentially including much cheaper housing for couples with multiple children. Japan is trying the economic incentive route, but not at sufficient rates to make it economically worth it. If China were to offer much cheaper housing, that would certainly encourage more children. Especially as housing in the east parts of China is as if not more expensive than much of Canada, with much lower incomes

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Oddly enough, this isn't happening.

It won't, it will offer significant economic incentives to have more children, much as it had economic penalties to those having more than one

 

[Surrealistik]

China has 20 years before it becomes an issue,

In those 20 years, robot density will increase dramatically,

Less than that; it has roughly 20 years before the demography issue alone starts becoming truly bad, to say nothing of the other issues facing it like decoupling, friendshoring, mounting debt crises and an increasingly competitive South and Central Asia.

Moreover, for all of its investment in robotics, China has only become a less competitive and compelling place to do business vis a vis these up and coming manufacturers as the cost of doing business there continues to handily outpace that of its regional competitors.

 

[craig]

China has 20 years before it becomes an issue,

In those 20 years, robot density will increase dramatically, it will also try various policies to increase birth rates, potentially including much cheaper housing for couples with multiple children. Japan is trying the economic incentive route, but not at sufficient rates to make it economically worth it. If China were to offer much cheaper housing, that would certainly encourage more children. Especially as housing in the east parts of China is as if not more expensive than much of Canada, with much lower incomes

Where will China get the money to build all those robots. International investment in China is drying up and they don't have a consumer economy to fund their own, All of their savings is in a huge bubble in real estate that is losing value as the population ages and shrinks.

European Interest in China Investments Wanes (Published 2022)

Spending by European companies on new factories and other “greenfield” investments, long a key source of capital and technology for the Chinese economy, is falling steeply.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Tangmo]

I'll save myself several thousand characters to let the WSJ say it much better instead.



The Wall Street Journal

China's Lost Decade for Investors Has Already Happened​

Deflation looms. The workforce is shrinking and aging. The property boom has turned to bust, leaving a legacy of heavy debt. Cash-rich consumers won’t spend. Investors in China have had a lost decade or more already. Domestic share prices are lower than they were in 2007, and earnings per share are the same as in 2013 [when Xi Jinping assumed full powers]. No wonder Chinese stocks are among the cheapest in the world. To understand the problem, go back to basics. Growth comes from only three places: more people, more capital or better use of workers and capital—higher productivity. China won’t have more workers, as its population began to shrink last year.

Throwing more capital at the economy got it into its current problems, as companies and governments borrowed far too much to build. That leaves productivity. But productivity is everywhere except in the statistics, where it has been falling for more than a decade. Weak earnings and low share prices are the natural corollary of weak productivity, and the government is standing in the way of improvement. Economic growth in the second quarter of the year was just 3.2% annualized. The danger is that this is only the start. Put simply, China borrowed and invested way too much into unproductive assets such as housing, while suppressing consumption. The past few years brought a clampdown on private education and the most productive high-technology sectors, and a fight with the U.S. that has led to restrictions on microchip imports. Stephen Roach, former chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia and a senior fellow at Yale Law School’s Paul Tsai China Center, says China has talked a lot about pivoting to consumer-led growth, but done little.

MSN

When Xi Jinping assumed full powers in 2013 his primary task was to accelerate household spending that was in the 60th percentile throughout Western and East Asia Tiger Economies. Indeed, CCP household spending was 43% of GDP in 2013. By 2019 Chinese household spending was a still feeble 46% where it continues to stumble around incrementally. Xi's interest has always been against Taiwan and in the SCS, not the economy.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Where will China get the money to build all those robots. International investment in China is drying up and they don't have a consumer economy to fund their own, All of their savings is in a huge bubble in real estate that is losing value as the population ages and shrinks.

European Interest in China Investments Wanes (Published 2022)

Spending by European companies on new factories and other “greenfield” investments, long a key source of capital and technology for the Chinese economy, is falling steeply.

www.nytimes.com

Vast amount of internal saving. It is rich enough not to need foreign investment

Remember China does have a huge trade surplus, ie more money going in rather than out. It has so much money it spent quite a bit on the belt and road projects rather than keep it in US government bonds.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Less than that; it has roughly 20 years before the demography issue alone starts becoming truly bad, to say nothing of the other issues facing it like decoupling, friendshoring, mounting debt crises and an increasingly competitive South and Central Asia.

Moreover, for all of its investment in robotics, China has only become a less competitive and compelling place to do business vis a vis these up and coming manufacturers as the cost of doing business there continues to handily outpace that of its regional competitors.

China has actively been pushing low value manufacturing outside of China. Textile production has been moved out, labor intensive, but low skill and low wage, China wants to focus on higher value production so losing those factories to foreign countries while many of the factories are still owned by Chinese companies is a goal of the Chinese government

Mounting debt is an issue for many countries. Korea, Germany and Australia are about the only ones without a debt crisis. China's will be minor compared to that of the US, Japan and Italy for example

 

[Napoleon]

It won't, it will offer significant economic incentives to have more children, much as it had economic penalties to those having more than one

And fortunately that hasn’t been necessary because Asia is the land of weird social trends and “twinning” has been a popular trend in China for decades.

Point is that if China ever does have a population crisis - and it’s not there yet - there are loads of things they can do to get out of it.

 

[Surrealistik]

China has actively been pushing low value manufacturing outside of China. Textile production has been moved out, labor intensive, but low skill and low wage, China wants to focus on higher value production so losing those factories to foreign countries while many of the factories are still owned by Chinese companies is a goal of the Chinese government

Mounting debt is an issue for many countries. Korea, Germany and Australia are about the only ones without a debt crisis. China's will be minor compared to that of the US, Japan and Italy for example

The problem of course, is that China increasingly isn't the party who owns the industrial production going forward; this is exactly why it's a problem, nevermind that competitors like India are investing considerably in more sophisticated industrialization, while re-shoring/re-industrialization of advanced manufacturing is all the rage in the West, and shows little sign of abating in light of China's glaring political and economic (including IP theft/espionage) risks, heightened and motivated by Xi's constant flexing and sabre rattling which were one of the core motivations underwriting such policies.


As to debt crises, China's reckoning will be notably worse than the US' (if the latter ever happens) for multiple reasons:

The true ratio of total Chinese debt to GDP is almost certainly notably higher than America's when including derivative markets and shadow banking as well as obligations concealed by lease agreements and private-public partnerships, and accounting for the fact that its GDP is likely overreported by more than 20% as a consequence of cumulative, compounding exaggerations of its true growth rate over many years. This isn't even accounting for the debt of state owned enterprises and banks which are not included in official Chinese figures, along with the debts of Macau and Hong Kong, accounts payable and guarantees to the private banking sector. In short, China judiciously hides the true extent of its debts and economic size, the former being much larger, while the latter is significantly smaller than officially reported.

Its savings are tied up heavily in egregious malinvestment per the real estate sector, and failing Belt and Road and other infrastructure initiatives; as others have noted, the former accounts for an extremely unhealthy percentage of private savings at 70%+

It is not even close to being a world reserve currency, nor does the Yuan/Renminbi command nearly the same confidence or demand as the USD, nor does the rest of the world have nearly the same vested interest in upkeeping China in the event of crisis as the US (the latter is literally 'too big to fail, or be permitted to fail at present).

Unlike the US, it, as stated, has serious and likely intractable demography issues and rapidly declining competitiveness it has no credible answers for that are already a problem going on existential in a couple of decades.

Lastly foreign investment in China is rapidly drying up, friendshoring and reindustrialization are eroding the bred and butter of trade with and export to the West that China is completely dependent upon for its largesse and wealth, while China has not, in any significant respect, managed to prepare a contingency for, either via internal consumption, or a pivot to other markets.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Friend shoring will turn into a costly failure

Costs will be higher, just when the next recession hits, leading to failures of many of those new factories

What most people misunderstand is that China grew not because of foreign investment, but because of effective government policies that supported growth and development. Mexico has lower labor costs, but a worse business environment, worse logistics and a less technical workforce. It is good for base low skilled manufacturing.

It can change but will require mass investments in people and infrastructure. Things it historically has not done. The same goes for India, it had a higher GDP and GDP per capita than China in the 90s but now is multiple lower

 

[Tangmo]

Vast amount of internal saving. It is rich enough not to need foreign investment

Remember China does have a huge trade surplus, ie more money going in rather than out. It has so much money it spent quite a bit on the belt and road projects rather than keep it in US government bonds.

“The primary issue now is stability, not growth.”Chen Gong, founder of Beijing-based think tank Anbound.


Belt & Road announced by Xi Jinping in 2013 is a bust.

While the Chinese are arrogant bullies they are always and above all else grandiose.

Each and every China dynasty has failed and the young and nervous CCP Dynasty of emperors in business suits is smack on course to its own failure.

Road to nowhere: China’s Belt and Road Initiative at tipping point​

BRI projects are now under increased scrutiny after Sri Lanka declared itself officially bankrupt in July.​

Chen told Nikkei: “State-owned companies are mentioning less and less about financial expansion along BRI, and what they are mentioning more now is, will you get your money back for this project?” Although the overall development environment around the BRI has worsened, one cannot expect the Chinese government to come out and announce it won't stay the course, Chen told Nikkei. The BRI, after all, has been a top priority for China, he noted. “It is inevitable that the BRI will be adjusted,” Chen said. “And it may shrink from a strategic vision of economic cooperation across land and sea to a regional multilateral cooperation initiative, or completely abandoned on a gradual basis -- again depending on the top leader's will.”

Road to nowhere: China's Belt and Road Initiative at tipping point

Pakistan, Sri Lanka debt crises threaten Beijing's regional influence

asia.nikkei.com

Xi reliably is a grandiose fool, same as his predecessor emperors have been and as Xi's successors will continue to be.

B&R Project Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport in Sri Lanka is aka "The World's Emptiest Airport"

Sri Lanka’s Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport opened to much fanfare in 2013 but has barely been used since. “The World’s Emptiest International Airport,” as it was dubbed, has other problems: Suren Ratwatte, former chief executive officer of SriLankan Airlines, told Nikkei that the airport was built on a traditional elephant migration route. “The airport has a serious problem with elephants, wild boar, peacocks … all of which can seriously damage an aircraft.” (Photo by Getty Images) CCP itself of course has 63 "Ghost Cities."

 

[Tangmo]

China has actively been pushing low value manufacturing outside of China. Textile production has been moved out, labor intensive, but low skill and low wage, China wants to focus on higher value production so losing those factories to foreign countries while many of the factories are still owned by Chinese companies is a goal of the Chinese government

Mounting debt is an issue for many countries. Korea, Germany and Australia are about the only ones without a debt crisis. China's will be minor compared to that of the US, Japan and Italy for example

CCP BoyZ have finally busted through 300% on their debt to GDP ratio.

This is because the CCP currency the RMB / Yuan comes directly from Parker Bros. It's the CCP BoyZ favorite in-house game.

And it's why CCP needs the US dollar real money to shore it up against inflation. Funny thing now though is that deflation is seeping into the economy and financial system. The ongoing and so called Trade War has decreased steadily the inflow of USD for China. Now the CCP BoyZ don't know whether they're coming or going. Indeed they never did know.

The overriding issue in China now is stability, because growth has faded. When Xi got power in 2013 GDP growth was 9% -- this year it's running at 3%, same as last year. It's been a straight downward line across the chart. Hell bent to break through zero and keep going.

 

[Tangmo]

It is not even close to being a world reserve currency, nor does the Yuan/Renminbi command nearly the same confidence or demand as the USD, nor does the rest of the world have nearly the same vested interest in upkeeping China in the event of crisis as the US (the latter is literally 'too big to fail, or be permitted to fail at present).

Indeed, the CCP capital markets are strictly limited and severely restricted concerning foreign investment.

And nobody wants or can utilize a global currency from a nation has has closed capital markets. US capital markets have long been wide open which is a major source of US economic strength and financial stability. It's the interdependency and the reliability of a rules based order that does it.

Nor is CCP going to take down the moat and wall it has around its capital markets. Number one it's too much fun for the Boyz to play with as they please. Number two foreign involvement in their capital markets would necessarily change the CCP economy and financial systems away from centralized CCP control into becoming much more market oriented. The BoyZ can't have that -- no way. Hell, democracy might even break out after all.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

@Tangmo is in good company, with folks like @serpentza over on YouTube who, like Tangmo, lived and worked in China for a decade or more.

 

[Surrealistik]

Friend shoring will turn into a costly failure

Costs will be higher, just when the next recession hits, leading to failures of many of those new factories

That's an interestingly take, particularly when half the point of friendshoring, above and beyond avoiding the political and economic risks poised by China, is to lower costs in the first place.

What most people misunderstand is that China grew not because of foreign investment, but because of effective government policies that supported growth and development. Mexico has lower labor costs, but a worse business environment, worse logistics and a less technical workforce. It is good for base low skilled manufacturing.

It can change but will require mass investments in people and infrastructure. Things it historically has not done. The same goes for India, it had a higher GDP and GDP per capita than China in the 90s but now is multiple lower

The notion that China owes little to nothing of its success to foreign investment is just categorically untrue and frankly absurd; if anything it owes virtually all of its rapid growth to foreign investment, and, at the root of that, gradual liberalization/normalization of trade with the West which it depends so completely on. Remember that as recently as 1992, trade with China accounted for less than 5% of the US' foreign imports; it was Clinton's normalization of trade, and waiving of human rights requirements that resulted in the massive explosion of trade and wealth in the country since as can be readily seen on any graph. By the end of Clinton's tenure, Chinese imports stood at nearly 9% of total foreign imports; 10 years after trade normalization with China was completed in 2000 per Clinton's US/China Relations Act, that more than doubled to 19%. Moreover, Chinese industrial capacity and trade (and wealth) first really started to take off in the first place around the 80s when the CCP got out of the way of foreign trade and investment.

Without these things, there could be no mass and rapid net migration and off-shoring of industrial capacity to China that was instrumental to it both to becoming a manufacturing power house, and being able to accelerate its technological base by tens of trillions worth through both legitimate knowledge sharing and systemic IP theft via coerced partnerships and a litany of spycraft opportunities presented by such economic integration.

While the CCP did implement policies facilitating development and migration of this industrial base, and was of course willing to dumpster its environment, absorb terrible externalities and turn a blind eye to horrid work conditions that would never be tolerated in the West, ultimately it was this foreign trade and investment that made, and continues to make the entire thing possible; that and a massive, sprawling population that was an irresistible source of exploitable, cheap labour which is presently not as competitive as it once was. In short, China indisputably owes an overwhelming preponderance of its wealth and success to foreigners seeking to exploit its cheap labour markets and largely unregulated environment, and willing to turn a blind eye to its abysmal human rights and ethical depravities in order to do so.

 

[Tangmo]

China took off like a rocket when in 2001 and championed by the US the CCP BoyZ were admitted to the WTO. When GW became Potus in January 2001 Clinton had put all the ducks in their row for it.

The West did a fast and massive exodus into China. Retail corporations such as Carrefour of France, Tesco of the UK, Walmart of the US among other nationals. Western corporate manufacturers swarmed into factories packed with ready made cheap labor who lived on the factory grounds in dorms and got fed three times a day.

Very quickly the CCP BoyZ made four passports "golden" -- USA, UK, Germany, Australia. Any one of the four passports made you golden in China. Write your own ticket. Chose your own employer.

Young people in the countryside tossed their dung shovels and headed to the Big City to make a buck in the factories instead of slaving for their parents on their pig farm. My easiest job was teaching English at a Chinese office supply manufacturer in Shenzhen who sold his stuff to Office Depot, Staples, Dollar Store among others in the USA. The owner, executives and office staff knew English already but I wasn't going to refuse the bucks ha. We sat around in the conference room talking for an hour each morning. Each of us got paid for it. I had the owner's unused condo. Lunch in the executive suite.

The CCP and other Chinese corporate elites had only one question for the Western executives : "How do we do that?"

The rest is history and I mean history. Xi Jinping and his dominant CCP faction changed all that. Xi torched Deng Xiao Ping's maxim to disguise your intentions until you're ready to strike. Xi doesn't disguise anything.