Wall Street Journal: The Coming Chinese Crackup

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-coming-chinese-crack-up-1425659198?mod=WSJ_hp_RightTopStories

The endgame of Chinese communist rule has now begun, I believe, and it has progressed further than many think. We don’t know what the pathway from now until the end will look like, of course. It will probably be highly unstable and unsettled. But until the system begins to unravel in some obvious way, those inside of it will play along—thus contributing to the facade of stability.

Consider five telling indications of the regime’s vulnerability and the party’s systemic weaknesses.

First, China’s economic elites have one foot out the door, and they are ready to flee en masse if the system really begins to crumble. In 2014, Shanghai’s Hurun Research Institute, which studies China’s wealthy, found that 64% of the “high net worth individuals” whom it polled—393 millionaires and billionaires—were either emigrating or planning to do so. Rich Chinese are sending their children to study abroad in record numbers (in itself, an indictment of the quality of the Chinese higher-education system).

Just this week, the Journal reported, federal agents searched several Southern California locations that U.S. authorities allege are linked to “multimillion-dollar birth-tourism businesses that enabled thousands of Chinese women to travel here and return home with infants born as U.S. citizens.” Wealthy Chinese are also buying property abroad at record levels and prices, and they are parking their financial assets overseas, often in well-shielded tax havens and shell companies.

Second, since taking office in 2012, Mr. Xi has greatly intensified the political repression that has blanketed China since 2009. The targets include the press, social media, film, arts and literature, religious groups, the Internet, intellectuals, Tibetans and Uighurs, dissidents, lawyers, NGOs, university students and textbooks. The Central Committee sent a draconian order known as Document No. 9 down through the party hierarchy in 2013, ordering all units to ferret out any seeming endorsement of the West’s “universal values”—including constitutional democracy, civil society, a free press and neoliberal economics.

A more secure and confident government would not institute such a severe crackdown. It is a symptom of the party leadership’s deep anxiety and insecurity.

I know China watchers have said this for a very long time but this particular expert is renowned has been very optimistic until now so it's worth taking note.

Lots more at the link and I urge everyone to read it.
 
Demographics in China will be brutal in the coming decades as an older society and imbalanced gender society both cause issues. I don't see how a country with a rapidly aging population can keep growing much longer.
 
When their working class, who are treated like slaves, finally finds strong voices to lead them it's going to get crazy.
 
Demographics in China will be brutal in the coming decades as an older society and imbalanced gender society both cause issues. I don't see how a country with a rapidly aging population can keep growing much longer.

This is how I see. It's a massive country, and yet it seems that alot of it is in a sort of stasis of poverty-As in, there is no fluctuation of class.
 
It's always surprised me how many rich Chinese parents send their kids overseas to study. Is it cause they want their kids to be more familiarised with Western settings, or are Chinese universities as bad as the article alludes to?
 
It's always surprised me how many rich Chinese parents send their kids overseas to study. Is it cause they want their kids to be more familiarised with Western settings, or are Chinese universities as bad as the article alludes to?

Well the UK and US have world leading Universities. It takes time to create goo quality universities. These parents want their children to be educated to the fullest.
 
There were quite a few rich Chinese students when I did my MA at a UK university.

All of them expressed interest in not returning to their homeland.
 
Not just the rich are leaving China. I know an educated married couple who moved away from China the first chance they got. The thing is, he found work in Thailand and she in Switzerland. This has been going on for a couple of years now and they are still married while burning a lot of money on plane tickets.

Their main reason to leave China, the corruption. It is very difficult to make a career there if you do not have the connections with higher society.
 
Man, if the break happens, I can't wait for the inevitable books about everything.

It's so frustrating to be someone who finds modern china fascinating only to be stonewalled almost completely when looking for anything to read about its government and political history due to how tied down everything is. I mean I imagine it's probably a little better if you can speak the language, but given how big of a deal china is today you'd think there would be more you could read about it.
 
As long as it doesn't happen while I'm here. The last thing I want is for there to be a revolution while I'm around.
 
On the political road, the US and China reached the intersection of capitalism to the right and communism to left. The US turned right and China turned its left blinker on and also turned right.
 
There were quite a few rich Chinese students when I did my MA at a UK university.

All of them expressed interest in not returning to their homeland.

I work at the uni with the highest chinese population and almost everyone wants to go back. The Chinese here tend to stay in their own little cliques unlike most other nationalities, unfortunately :( Obviously both are anecdotal.

On the political road, the US and China reached the intersection of capitalism to the right and communism to left. The US turned right and China turned its left blinker on and also turned right.

I like this a lot.
 
China scholars have been predicting the inevitable collapse of CCP rule for decades on end now, but who knows, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Just wake me up when it finally happens.
 
Things change for the worse for rich people. Cue article that decries this change as a massive upending to stability. Boo hoo. One step back, ten steps forward. Emigrating to the US? The US is also on the brink of class warfare. It may be further away but it's coming.
 
Things change for the worse for rich people. Cue article that decries this change as a massive upending to stability. Boo hoo. One step back, ten steps forward. Emigrating to the US? The US is also on the brink of class warfare. It may be further away but it's coming.
Easy to say if you're not the one living through that step back, filled with possible chaos, instability and fights.

And class warfare in the US? Give me a break.
 
Easy to say if you're not the one living through that step back, filled with possible chaos, instability and fights.

And class warfare in the US? Give me a break.

It's easy to say because I know where I'd rather my country be. I guess if you're OK wallowing in stability, great. I am glad my previous generation Americans didn't have that mindset, else I'd still be enslaved.

You're right, the growing trend of Occupy Wall Street, anti Super PAC, fights over minimum wage increases, etc. needs to give you a break.
 
Things change for the worse for rich people. Cue article that decries this change as a massive upending to stability. Boo hoo. One step back, ten steps forward. Emigrating to the US? The US is also on the brink of class warfare. It may be further away but it's coming.

The issue is not whether the corrupt and wealthy Chinese ought to keep their considerable privileges but the specific manner in which the anti-corruption campaign is being undertaken. A war against the wealthy is one thing but a war between the wealthy (remember Xi Jinping probably has a net worth that makes Mitt Romney look like a pauper) is another beast altogether. Factional strife and capital flight are incredibly severe risks for developing economies. If these continue to fester, the fallout could be severe, especially against the backdrop of China's slowing economy which is now hitting 7% growth far sooner than expected, when for many years economists have said that 8% is needed to prevent labor unrest.

Further, aside from the plight of the wealthy being just a fraction of the article, I think you're mischaracterising the author. This is not a typical article arguing for stability for the sake of Wall Street investors. Apologies if I've misread you in turn!
 
China scholars have been predicting the inevitable collapse of CCP rule for decades on end now, but who knows, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Just wake me up when it finally happens.

Exactly. I feel like I've been reading this story since Tiananmen Square. I can't see the Party getting overthrown any time soon. Even though Chinese media is censored and society rigidly controlled and the CCP elites are rich and corrupt the people lack the intelligence and will to change anything. Most Chinese are not forward thinking or progressive.
 
Living in Taiwan, I see the Kuomintang (Chinese Loyalist party) similarly grasping at straws in the face of huge strides made recently by the DPP (pro-independence party). This whole region is set for massive change, and soon.

Families who grew up in the mainland are fleeing to areas with fewer regulations on thought, expression, and consumption, like Korea, Taiwan, and Japan in the East, or Canada and the States in the West. Plus, everyone wants their son or daughter (hahaha, of course I mean son) to attend an Ivy League school, and they'll lie to, cheat, and bribe whoever they have to in order to see it happen.

The 2020s are going to be an interesting decade.
 
The issue is not whether the corrupt and wealthy Chinese ought to keep their considerable privileges but the specific manner in which the anti-corruption campaign is being undertaken. A war against the wealthy is one thing but a war between the wealthy (remember Xi Jinping probably has a net worth that makes Mitt Romney look like a pauper) is another beast altogether. Factional strife and capital flight are incredibly severe risks for developing economies. If these continue to fester, the fallout could be severe, especially against the backdrop of China's slowing economy which is now hitting 7% growth far sooner than expected, when for many years economists have said that 8% is needed to prevent labor unrest.

Further, aside from the plight of the wealthy being just a fraction of the article, I think you're mischaracterising the author. This is not a typical article arguing for stability for the sake of Wall Street investors. Apologies if I've misread you in turn!
Good post, thank you. Any other articles discussing this?
 
Well, if we assume history will repeat itself then we 'all see it coming', don't we?

But I suspect things will go different from what you might expect. Though the obvious problem for China is that they choose repression instead relaxation. Effectively, they are playing the pre-Gorbatsjov game if we assume historical consistency. What they need however, is the equivalent of Glasnost. Or at least, so would a Western observer believe.

I doubt it's going to go like anyone expects it to go.
 
David Shambaugh in 2012:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...cd4402-2f47-11e2-9f50-0308e1e75445_story.html

For the past five years real reform has been blunted by the “Iron Quadrangle”: mammoth state-owned enterprises, the internal security apparatus, the military and the conservative wing of the Communist Party. The coalition of these four power interest groups “captured” Hu, who was too weak and disinclined to stand up to them, and they stalled reforms.

For his part, Xi, like Hu, remains a cipher: We do not know whether he is a closet reformer, a real reformer or another apparatchik-technocrat. His background suggests the last. At least he smiles and has a warmer public persona than the wooden Hu. Nonetheless, Xi & Co. will be trapped by these and other powerful vested interests that strangled the would-be reforms of Hu’s more progressive advisers and the acolytes of his predecessor, Jiang Zemin. To break the Iron Quadrangle and launch the much-needed new reforms will require enormous vision and willpower on Xi’s part, an investment of huge institutional resources to buy them off, and time. It will be at least two years before Xi can consolidate his power and be in a position to tackle the powerful vested interests that run China today. And it is not clear that he is even so inclined.

Seems like his thesis is just that the "iron quadrangle" is unbreakable. And he argues that by trying to break it now, Xi is playing a dangerous game. It may be that he is biased from his sources from within the entrenched interests--his previous works are all about how entrenched and unbreakable the interests are in society.

In 2015, he still thinks the vested interests are too powerful for Xi to take on.
Going after Mr. Jiang’s patronage network while he is still alive is highly risky for Mr. Xi, particularly since Mr. Xi doesn’t seem to have brought along his own coterie of loyal clients to promote into positions of power. Another problem: Mr. Xi, a child of China’s first-generation revolutionary elites, is one of the party’s “princelings,” and his political ties largely extend to other princelings. This silver-spoon generation is widely reviled in Chinese society at large.

There are other scholars that think Xi's actions will break the vested interests that prevent economic reforms:

http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2014/12/15-xi-jinpin-reform-kroeber

Understanding the primacy of governance reform is essential to grasping the role of the anti-corruption campaign, which has resulted in the investigation or disciplining of over 70,000 officials at all levels of government in virtually every province, and has now spread to senior levels of the People’s Liberation Army. This campaign is often portrayed as a cynical effort by Xi Jinping to consolidate power, eliminate his enemies and curtail the influence of retired senior leaders, notably former Presidents Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao. These motives no doubt play a large role, but the campaign is too far-reaching, and has gone on for too long, for them to be a full explanation.

It is now apparent that the campaign’s central goal is to sharply reduce the system’s tolerance of corruption, which has been quite high since the beginning of economic reforms in the late 1970s. This, in turn, suggests a desire to renegotiate the basic bargain between the central and local governments that has held throughout the reform period. In essence, that bargain tasked local officials with maximizing economic growth, in exchange for which they were tacitly permitted to skim off part of the financial gains from that growth. Central authorities only cracked down when the graft reached grotesque proportions (as with smuggling scandals in Xiamen and other coastal cities in south China in the late 1990s), or when political and policy interests converged in an exemplary prosecution (as in the purge of Shanghai party Secretary Chen Liangyu in 2005, which both removed a Politburo rival to Hu Jintao and sent a message to cities to rein in property speculation).

This bargain proved effective in stimulating sustained rapid growth while China was still a low-income country. But the nation’s economy has now matured and with a per capita national income of $6,560, China now qualifies as an upper-middle income country, by the World Bank’s definition. To sustain high growth at this income level, China needs better governance, a more reliable legal system and considerably less corruption. Thus, the anti-graft campaign is not incidental to or a distraction from the main reform agenda—it is an essential part of the foundation of a more successful economic and political system.
 
It makes me lol everytime their county is mentioned to be communist and in the next sentences it mentions millionares and billionares.

Marx is rolling in his grave.
 
It makes me lol everytime their county is mentioned to be communist and in the next sentences it mentions millionares and billionares.

Marx is rolling in his grave.

Russians will also say they had a 'socialist' regime rather than communist, but I think the colloquial difference is pretty much moot, since it was clearly intended to be an appeal to that collection of ideas about how to get to utopia.

Also, Engels had more to do with the Communist Manifest than Marx did, who abandoned it halfway because he just did for the money (oh, the irony).
Marx's real work was The Capital, of course. And it basically is a definition of Western capitalism, so why there is even a false dichotomy between "capitalism" and "communism" is anyone's guess. It's all rhetoric, basically. In reality Das Kapital has more to do with modern Western capitalism than with any political system that selects a particular economic strategy based on its idiosyncratic ideology.
 
Truly, a worker's paradise. Socialism/Communism doesn't have a very good batting average at keeping their ideals straight.
 
It's easy to say because I know where I'd rather my country be. I guess if you're OK wallowing in stability, great. I am glad my previous generation Americans didn't have that mindset, else I'd still be enslaved.

You're right, the growing trend of Occupy Wall Street, anti Super PAC, fights over minimum wage increases, etc. needs to give you a break.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad people are standing up for themselves and their rights. But when I read stuff like 'class warfare' it sounds like you advocate for revolution and violence against the upper class. I rather have those things worked out by peaceful protest and making use of the democratic processes we have in place to achieve it. The biggest problem there is most of the population don't care or buy into (to me) false messages.
 
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad people are standing up for themselves and their rights. But when I read stuff like 'class warfare' it sounds like you advocate for revolution and violence against the upper class. I rather have those things worked out by peaceful protest and making use of the democratic processes we have in place to achieve it. The biggest problem there is most of the population don't care or buy into (to me) false messages.

I don't know how else to put it but I think you read that into my post because I use a black person as my avatar.
 
Im kind of embarrassed to know so little about china, but are they communist in name only? All these billionares is there any form of wealth distribution going on at all?
 
When china goes down, will they drag the U.S with them?

They own most of the US's debt.

I believe that while they are the largest foreign debt holder, the majority of debt is actually held domestically by companies and such that have purchased bonds. I know I've seen this in "commonly-heard myths" type articles before but I cannot remember the exactly details.
 
When their working class, who are treated like slaves, finally finds strong voices to lead them it's going to get crazy.
The working class is shrinking. China's middle class is, by some measures, almost twice the population of the U.S., and almost as big as the entire EU. It's true that even that is still less than half the population of the country, but the idea that it's a country with only the very rich and very poor is woefully outdated.

Of course, a large educated middle class usually means a stronger push for human rights and freedom, so we'll see where this leads.

Im kind of embarrassed to know so little about china, but are they communist in name only? All these billionares is there any form of wealth distribution going on at all?
depends on how you define it. Many industries are still heavily state-owned or under heavy state-influence but in some ways, there is also a lot less regulation of the private sector (such as in consumer-protectionism). And due to the sheer size of the country's population, there is an enormous private sector there so tons of people are making good money.
 
I work at the uni with the highest chinese population and almost everyone wants to go back. The Chinese here tend to stay in their own little cliques unlike most other nationalities, unfortunately :( Obviously both are anecdotal.

I have the exact same experience. I've tried to befriend chinese students but it's almost impossible. They are only interested in hanging with their own crowd. I've been to school with people from a lot of different nationalities and the chinese are the only ones I've met who act like this.
 
Hyuk hyuk. Wealth distribution. It's worse than America. Republicans wish they were Chinese.
I don't think Republicans wish for the kind of taxes and infrastructure spending that China undertakes (let alone state-owned enterprises). Income taxes up to 45% (not including 10% for social/medical insurance), VAT at 17%, gas and custom taxes are also very high.
 
I don't think Republicans wish for the kind of taxes and infrastructure spending that China undertakes (let alone state-owned enterprises). Income taxes up to 45% (not including 10% for social/medical insurance), VAT at 17%, gas and custom taxes are also very high.
Yea, but there's no public healthcare or welfare. And the poor get to starve in the streets for being lazy good for nothings. Republicans would love it here.
 
When china goes down, will they drag the U.S with them?

They own most of the US's debt.

No they don't. US citizens own most of US debt. China is the largest foreign holder of US debt. China only owns 7.2% of it. Japan is right behind with 7%. The US, however, owns 65% of it.

Now, you could say that China could damage us by dumping that. 7.2% isn't insignificant.

However, why would they do this, they would literally be shooting themselves in the foot. That's like selling your house during the housing crash in 2008 when you didn't need to. Or selling tech stocks in 2001 during the dot com crash. Or selling oil right now when you bought last year.

7% is most?

edit: ok it's 21%, sorry

China owns 21%...of foreign held debt. Not all of the debt, just foreign held debt.
 
Yea, but there's no public healthcare or welfare. And the poor get to starve in the streets for being lazy good for nothings. Republicans would love it here.
There are public healthcare and pension reforms in place and moving forward, health care is still largely tie to hukou (you get less reimbursed if you are outside, but the rural and urban pension systems have been integrated as of last year). I really don't think there are many things that Republicans would like about China.
 
Good post, thank you. Any other articles discussing this?

On the economics side, I think the two important topics are municipal bonds and shadow banking since they are the primary structural flaws that inflate the property market. I typically read forecasts by the IMF, World Bank, and investment banks at work and I don't have the means to link those but Google should yield lots of results from financial newspapers that all give an adequate primer on why these are problems. New reports come out at a dizzying pace. Here is a recent summary and comparison of some relevant indicators for economic health. If this housing bubble pops, it will probably cripple the financial sector and beyond as some Chinese municipalities are funding their budgets with land sales. I can't find the article now but I believe the source stated 35% for some major cities which is absolutely bonkers.

There are also many sources out there that discuss the falling competitiveness of China's manufacturing sector which, as we all know, has been the cornerstone of the Chinese economy. This index illustrates the decline very well. As you can see, we are probably at the point where it's cheaper to manufacture in the United States when taking into account ease of doing business. We had someone recently from the Guangzhou office of the US Chamber of Commerce tell us that all of their members are no longer, or planning to end, producing goods for export and to instead sell exclusively to the Chinese market. This trend does not automatically guarantee doom but domestic demand cannot makeup for the forthcoming decline of exports without significant wage growth which will hurt competitiveness, and in turn employment, even further. This will be a challenging manoeuvre to execute deftly which is why people emphasise the importance of political reforms. This is why high growth is still important but maintaining that is at odds with the emerging frailties of the debt situation discussed earlier. Conventional wisdom states that the central bank should tighten when the market overheats and loosen when the economy slows down but either option has its acute risks in this context.

This is all playing out beneath the shadow of a potentially catastrophic demographics time bomb. China will see, in the next few decades, hundreds of millions of elderly who have no families, living in a society that will probably have a very limited social safety net so there is a time limit on the near horizon to orchestrate a smooth transition.

And then of course there's the environment.

I'm no guru on the political contours of the CCP but I can tell you that at my program, when I did the contemporary China courses, the article's author wrote a touchstone source. I believe this was the text we used.

It makes for a very stark contrast with the tone in this thread's article which is why it's raising eyebrows. The article seems to be the first indicator of his about-face so he will hopefully publish a lot more in the coming year.
 
There are public healthcare and pension reforms in place and moving forward, health care is still largely tie to hukou (you get less reimbursed if you are outside, but the rural and urban pension systems have been integrated as of last year). I really don't think there are many things that Republicans would like about China.
Being able to walk over the lower class with no repercussions.
 
On the political road, the US and China reached the intersection of capitalism to the right and communism to left. The US turned right and China turned its left blinker on and also turned right.

Wooooow, jokes about asian drivers aren't cool bro.

kidding, obviously :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom