Centre for Economics and Business Research says it expects this to happen half a decade sooner than it forecast a year ago

China’s share of global GDP has increased from 3.6% in 2000 to 17.8% in 2019 and will continue to grow, the CEBR said. It would pass the per capita threshold of $12,536 (£9,215) to become a high-income country by 2023.

absolutely insane

    • KiaKaha [he/him]
      4·
      4 years ago

      I was with you right up until your conclusion.

      It sounds like ‘developing the productive forces’ is exactly what happened, with the corruption and other excesses to boot. Now Xi’s reigning those excesses in, like you’ve pointed out.

      The big next step is ‘demand side reforms’, meaning reducing inequality. We’ll see how it goes, but if it’s anything like the poverty elimination programme, there’s reason to be hopeful.

      Regarding housing, you’re right. It’s one of the reasons Shenzhen is moving to the Singaporean housing model and ditching the Hong Kong one. This seems to be the outcome of Xi’s previous statement that houses should be for living in, not speculation.

      No one’s saying China’s a utopia. But it’s going in the right direction, which is a hell of a lot better than most other nations right now.

        • weshallovercum [any]
          3·
          4 years ago

          The neoclassical economists (neoliberals) delivered the results that China wanted

          Just wanna point out that China definitely didn't follow the neoliberal model, otherwise they would have privatized literally everything. China kept control of the commanding heights of the economy with the state.

            • Zodiark
              1·
              4 months ago

              deleted by creator

            • weshallovercum [any]
              1·
              4 years ago

              Neoliberalism has a much more strict definition than "privatizing parts of the economy". It means privatizing the majority of the economy, inclusing the commanding heights. Also using the state to enforce private property and crush labor is not a neoliberal policy, it is a universal phenomenon. Neoliberalism upholds that private ownership and markets are always better than state ownership. China had a huge amount of state ownership of assets and state control of the commanding heights throughout its fastest growing years. The SOEs were less profitable than private enterprises, inspite of that China's economy grew rapidly. If China truly was neoliberal, it would have privatized all SOEs from the start. And if neoliberal logic was true, China's economy should have suffered due to SOEs, rather than SOEs being one of the biggest reasons for it's rapid and consistent growth.

                • weshallovercum [any]
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  You're not getting my point. China is much closer to Keynesianism, Scandinavian-style social democracy than neoliberalism. Neoliberalism = USA, South Africa, Peru, Hong Kong etc. Keynesianism/socdem = Norway, Finland, Denmark etc. China is closer to the second group of nations than the first. Both Keynesians and Neoliberals would argue for privatization of the economy, but the extent of privatization is different. Keynesians call for the commanding heights of the economy to be controlled by the state, which is what China does. So it is quite categorically wrong to call China neoliberal. Like just ask any actual neoliberals if they think China is a neoliberal state.

      • aqwxcvbnji [none/use name]
        ·
        4 years ago

        You sound like someone who's well-read about the Chinese economy. Are there any books you would advise me to read on that subject?

        • KiaKaha [he/him]
          ·
          4 years ago

          I’ve mostly picked this up from following knowledgable folks like Michael Pettis on Twitter, and reading SCMP. Bloomberg China also occasionally has good coverage.

          I’ve got a list of books I’ve been intending to read, so I’ll put those down here.

          • China’s Gilded Age: the paradox of economic boom and vast corruption
          • Red Capitalism
          • The Dragon’s gift: the real story of China in Africa
          • The China Model: Political Meritocracy and the Limits of Democracy
          • When China Rules the World
          • Chen village: revolution to globalisation
          • The Morning Deluge
          • Inside the Mind of Xi Jinping

          Another option is podcasts. David Harvey has a good episode on the economic situation in China.

          Not all of these call China ‘socialist’, but that’s really secondary to the point of understanding the system. They’ll help with that.

          Of course, you can also go right back to the source and just read Deng.

          • aqwxcvbnji [none/use name]
            ·
            4 years ago

            Thanks! I already knew David harvey's China episodes in his podcast, but but I'm very happy with the suggested reading list Thank you very much!

          • summerbl1nd [none/use name]
            ·
            4 years ago

            depends on how you define downtown i guess. might still work for some village out in the sticks of pudong but ain't no one affording anything in lujiazui just on salary and relatives' money anymore unless you already stacked

              • summerbl1nd [none/use name]
                ·
                4 years ago

                yeah, i'm not trying to debate anything either. line 10? did they give you the area of the houses they bought by chance? cheap and central housing made me think of the old one room shikumen conversions for poor people where everyone had to sleep in cupboards lol, haven't seen any of those around in dogs years.

    • Awoo [she/her]
      2·
      4 years ago

      There is a reason why Chinese youth are flocking to read Marx and Mao again.

      "Again" ? You realise that marxism is a mandatory school subject right?

      I have to be deeply suspicious of anyone making lofty claims stated as fact and with extreme confidence without knowing very basic facts about the country.

      • summerbl1nd [none/use name]
        2·
        4 years ago

        politics and 'marxism' as it is taught in the high schools and universities is nationalism-lite with civic-bureaucratic characteristics (not unlike the us, although there is somewhat less of an emphasis on the mythos and narrative than social studies in murica), actual marxism is more often called something like political economy and is not mandatory

        • keki_ya [none/use name]
          ·
          4 years ago

          politics and ‘marxism’ as it is taught in the high schools and universities is nationalism-lite with civic-bureaucratic characteristics

          are you Chinese/received Chinese education? If so, could you elaborate? I'd love to know more about China's modern political education

          • summerbl1nd [none/use name]
            1·
            4 years ago

            was a bit of a hot take from me, they did used to go over the basics of LTV and things like how to understand SWCC (probably still do) but in recent years there has been a slant towards normativity (at least for the chinese equivalent of the GRE) in the framing of the CPC; less as representatives of the proletariat (because even the lumpenproles would see through any bs proclamations of a DotP in an instant) but rather as the guarantors of the continuing success of the chinese civilization and by extension the interests of all chinese people

            lots of technocratic box-checking and memorization of events/dates with the corresponding 'correct answer' consequences

    • aqwxcvbnji [none/use name]
      ·
      4 years ago

      You sound like someone who's well-read about the Chinese economy. Are there any books you would advise me to read on that subject?