China to Europe: Get off your asses

[Robert]

"If you look at the troubles which happened in European countries, this is purely because of the accumulated troubles of the worn out welfare society. I think the labour laws are outdated. The labour laws induce sloth, indolence, rather than hardworking. The incentive system, is totally out of whack.
"Why should, for instance, within [the] eurozone some member's people have to work to 65, even longer, whereas in some other countries they are happily retiring at 55, languishing on the beach? This is unfair. The welfare system is good for any society to reduce the gap, to help those who happen to have disadvantages, to enjoy a good life, but a welfare society should not induce people not to work hard."
Jin Liqun, the supervising chairman of China's sovereign wealth fund
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/talktojazeera/2011/11/2011114434664695.html

Whether this offends you or not, it explains why China has the cash and the momentum these days.

Europe and the USA had better get its shit together, yesterday, or the Chinese will just shrug and start investing their cash elsewhere. Don't think we don't need them, either.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

So Europe and America will now play Third World to China's America? Unlike the US the PRC bourgeoisie does not yet have the military/political power to enforce their own capitalist austerity.

China has the "cash and momentum" these days because ruling groups have been able to exploit a vast population of people driven from the countryside by converting the country into a manufacturing platform for US corporations, making China the sweatshop of the world.

The article also confirms, as if it was possible to mistake this, that there are two classes of importance in the world today, the working class and the bourgeoisie.

The people who really need to get of their asses are the Chinese,South Asian, middle Eastern, African, European, and North American working classes and replace this system with something in line with real human needs. ASAP.

[RGacky3]

Whether this offends you or not, whether you find it "idealistic" or not, it explains why China has the cash and the momentum these days.


Its bullshit, why is France and Germany extremely productive? Why is Sweeden extremely productive? All those countries have a way way more powerful labor force that have a ton of benefits beyond countries like Spain, Italy or Ireland, even better than Greece.

China should'nt be talking, Labor is leaving China and going to places with cheaper labor like bangladesh and India, and many of the "knowledge workers" in China are moving to places with better labor conditions for white collar workers (I.e. europe).

China NEEDS europe and the US, there is no way their domestic consumption can even come close to holding up their economy.

The problem in the USA is not at all too much of a welfare state, and if you look at it in europe, the problem is'nt too much a welfare state either (if it was the top welfare states would be the ones in trouble), the problem is financial capital run amuk. Talking about the incentive system .. if you want to look at a perverse incentive system look no further than the corporate structure in most countries.

Where is China gonna invest? Their threats are baseless.

[Die Neue Zeit]

If the Chinese authorities had said "the worn out corporate welfare society" and proceeded from there, I would have agreed with them.

[Robert]

Fine. Do whatever you want in Europe.

Deep down, the Chinese don't really care.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ It's Chinese money, though. :confused:

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Fine. Do whatever you want in Europe.

Deep down, the Chinese don't really care.

The working class does care because the "austerity" on the behalf or our kind banker friends is making our lives unlivable.

[Queercommie Girl]

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/talktojazeera/2011/11/2011114434664695.html

Whether this offends you or not, it explains why China has the cash and the momentum these days.

Europe and the USA had better get its shit together, yesterday, or the Chinese will just shrug and start investing their cash elsewhere. Don't think we don't need them, either.

Actually one reason why China is hit less hard by the current economic crisis is because the banks are nationalised and more tightly controlled in China, so you have less crazy financial speculation.

As for welfare and labour conditions, actually it's the other way around for China. It's actually in China's own national interest to improve conditions for China's workers, such as increasing wage levels, so that internal demand can be boosted. At the moment China is still to a significant extent relying on cheap labour which is a crude way to make money. If the Chinese economy is to qualitatively develop to a higher level, it would need to improve the quality of its workers, which would require significant improvements in labour conditions.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

If China pays it workers more, will it still be profitable as a manafacturi ng platform for foreign companies? China's whole success has been based on the exploitation of cheap labor. Already corporations are moving out of China to Malaysia, Vietnam and East Africa. The Chinese ruling class seems to be caught in a sort of "scissors crisis", they cannot increase their own internal market without raising wage rates but doing so will then drive manufacturing elsewhere.

An iPod made by Foxxcom workers goes for about $100 in the US.How much of this do the people who assembled this get to keep? The disparity seems incredible and I don't think China's ruling familes will be able to short circuit this in any meaningful way.

China's boom is export oriented and I don't see how de-linkage could work.

[Revolution starts with U]

Why you would think China is a model we should follow is beyond me...

[La Comédie Noire]

Yes, all of the industrialized nations have become "lazy" and have been demotivated by a generous welfare system.

It has nothing to do with labor to capital ratios and young vs old workers. :rolleyes:

[Queercommie Girl]

If China pays it workers more, will it still be profitable as a manafacturi ng platform for foreign companies? China's whole success has been based on the exploitation of cheap labor. Already corporations are moving out of China to Malaysia, Vietnam and East Africa. The Chinese ruling class seems to be caught in a sort of "scissors crisis", they cannot increase their own internal market without raising wage rates but doing so will then drive manufacturing elsewhere.

An iPod made by Foxxcom workers goes for about $100 in the US.How much of this do the people who assembled this get to keep? The disparity seems incredible and I don't think China's ruling familes will be able to short circuit this in any meaningful way.

China's boom is export oriented and I don't see how de-linkage could work.

China needs to raise the qualitative level of its industrial production, so rather than just mass assemble electronic goods at really cheap prices, it needs to have its own high-tech industry, with original technological innovation and design, like a Chinese version of the Apple brand or Microsoft if you like. At the moment China is on the lower end of the global production chain, and most of the core technological development and design are still done in America, Europe and Japan.

Of course I'm speaking from a capitalist perspective here, but even from a capitalist point of view, it's clear that China will never become a genuine "great power" as long as it mostly relies on selling out its cheap labour at lower ends of the production chain. And this is difficult to change as long as Western corporations continue to hold a monopoly in the world.

[RGacky3]

Fine. Do whatever you want in Europe.

Deep down, the Chinese don't really care.


BTW, Chinese investment??? Are you kidding me?

Are the Chinese the ones hiring Europeans? Are the Chinese the ones buying European products? Sure they are buying European capital, and intellectual property, but thats because they don't have a choice.

The Chinese "Investment" is nothing more than financial capital, buying up bonds, buying currencies and so on, basically hedging their own currency and skimming from the European/American economies. They arn't settting up companies in Europe or the US.

This statement is a total no Brainer. Its from the Chairman of the Chinese wealth fund. Meaning its from an investment banker, the Chinese national bank, like a shit load of other banks, loaned greece a bunch of money and they expect their money back with a high return, he could'nt care less what happens to the European economy, he just wants the austerity in Greece and other places so the bank gets its money bank quick.

This has nothing to do with whats better for investment, or for the economy or any of that, its just another banker insisting that the working class pay for their payouts.


As for welfare and labour conditions, actually it's the other way around for China. It's actually in China's own national interest to improve conditions for China's workers, such as increasing wage levels, so that internal demand can be boosted. At the moment China is still to a significant extent relying on cheap labour which is a crude way to make money. If the Chinese economy is to qualitatively develop to a higher level, it would need to improve the quality of its workers, which would require significant improvements in labour conditions.

Its a double edged sword for China, because trying to build a stronger working class in China might threaten outside investment, which China depends on, but on the other hand not building a stronger working class leaves them dependant on that outside investment and their export market.

[Judicator]

Why you would think China is a model we should follow is beyond me...

Who could say no to 10% YoY growth for 3 decades?

[ComradeMan]

What are the average standards of living and income for a Chinese worker, and his/her rights under law compared to a European worker?
:crying:

[Mather]

Who could say no to 10% YoY growth for 3 decades?

Prehaps the Chinese working class, most of whom have yet to benefit from such 'growth'.

When you have an authoritarian capitalist dictatorship (as China has) that has no minimum wage, no trade unions or workers rights, scant regard for the environment in economic planning and very high levels of corruption, then 10% economic 'growth' is not that hard to get.

Such as system will not last however. Over the last decade China has already seen a massive increase in social unrest, demonstrations, wildcat strikes and rioting, all against the corruption and oppression of China's rotten ruling class.

[Tim Cornelis]

Who could say no to 10% YoY growth for 3 decades?

Taking GDP growth as only basis of economic success is the most ridiculous thing anyone can ever claim--ever.

[Judicator]

Prehaps the Chinese working class, most of whom have yet to benefit from such 'growth'.

When you have an authoritarian capitalist dictatorship (as China has) that has no minimum wage, no trade unions or workers rights, scant regard for the environment in economic planning and very high levels of corruption, then 10% economic 'growth' is not that hard to get.

Such as system will not last however. Over the last decade China has already seen a massive increase in social unrest, demonstrations, wildcat strikes and rioting, all against the corruption and oppression of China's rotten ruling class.

I don't know why you put growth in disagree quotes. You must think the Chinese economy is getting smaller :lol:

No growth for workers? :lol: http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2010-06-17-chinalabor17_ST_N.htm
No minimum wage? :lol:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15456509


Taking GDP growth as only basis of economic success is the most ridiculous thing anyone can ever claim--ever.

Only basis? Your words not mine....

GDP measures everything produced in the market, so unless you think the underground economy is growing wildly in Ethiopia, we can conclude that the UK, as a country, is more economically productive than Ethiopia.

[ComradeMan]

...

People are not statistics.

[RGacky3]

Who could say no to 10% YoY growth for 3 decades?

A country where thats impossible without creating huge bubbles, giant systemic risk and terrible negative externalities because unlike China its had capitalism for centuries and has already grown into itself.


No growth for workers? :lol: http://www.usatoday.com/money/econom...bor17_ST_N.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2010-06-17-chinalabor17_ST_N.htm)
No minimum wage? :lol:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15456509 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15456509)



Yes, thanks to minimum wages and unions finally getting some traction (even though they are repressed all over the place, in China the success that unions have achieved is amazing, when you consider the odds they are against). Its funny to see you suddenly in favor ore regulations (in other threads), minimum wages and unions.

BTW, that huge growth in natural for any economy brand new to Capitalism, especially a huge country like China and one where the market is controlled.


GDP measures everything produced in the market, so unless you think the underground economy is growing wildly in Ethiopia, we can conclude that the UK, as a country, is more economically productive than Ethiopia.

GDP is a terrible measure of a healthy economy. Your missing tons and tons of elements.


People are not statistics.

yeah but statistics are all we have to look at.

[ComradeMan]

yeah but statistics are all we have to look at.

Nope. It's quite easy these days to look at the material conditions of the people, talk to people and listen to them. Statistics become masks to the disenfranchised masses, metaphors that hide the real impact of realworld decision making.

[RGacky3]

Nope. It's quite easy these days to look at the material conditions of the people, talk to people and listen to them. Statistics become masks to the disenfranchised masses, metaphors that hide the real impact of realworld decision making.

I think you need both, just listening to personal stories won't give you the big picture and will distort the underlying factors, but just relying on statistics can divorce the human impact.

[ComradeMan]

I think you need both, just listening to personal stories won't give you the big picture and will distort the underlying factors, but just relying on statistics can divorce the human impact.

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

But yeah, however too much economic discourse is based on statistics alone- look this country has growth of over XYZ % (but hey, the people are miserable and live in squalor)... get me? ;)

[RGacky3]

But yeah, however too much economic discourse is based on statistics alone- look this country has growth of over XYZ % (but hey, the people are miserable and live in squalor)... get me? http://www.revleft.com/vb/china-europe-get-t164004/revleft/smilies/wink.gif

Which is why you have standard of living measures, how else would you know that people are miserable and live in squalor? I can talk to a bunch of people in wealthy parts of Mexico and get the impression that its great.

[Bud Struggle]

yeah but statistics are all we have to look at.

It's for statements like that--I mock you. :)

[ZeroNowhere]

Nope. It's quite easy these days to look at the material conditions of the people, talk to people and listen to them. Statistics become masks to the disenfranchised masses, metaphors that hide the real impact of realworld decision making.
Deep.

[Bud Struggle]

Which is why you have standard of living measures, how else would you know that people are miserable and live in squalor? I can talk to a bunch of people in wealthy parts of Mexico and get the impression that its great.

Mexico is a third worth country that gets it's wealth from the United States.

[alegab]

Mexico is a third worth country that gets it's wealth from the United States.
still, as Gacky said it has amazing places

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Only basis? Your words not mine....

GDP measures everything produced in the market, so unless you think the underground economy is growing wildly in Ethiopia, we can conclude that the UK, as a country, is more economically productive than Ethiopia.

There's more to society than "economic productivity" as measured by profit-oriented capitalist metrics. What about civil and political rights, what about literacy and education, what about health and nutrition, what about the state of sciences and the environment?

Those kind of considerations are just as important and it's been shown time and time again that a society based on short-term profiteering cannot deliver acceptable conditions in those areas.

[RGacky3]

Mexico is a third worth country that gets it's wealth from the United States.

Your missing the point follow along.

[Os Cangaceiros]

GDP measures everything produced in the market, so unless you think the underground economy is growing wildly in Ethiopia, we can conclude that the UK, as a country, is more economically productive than Ethiopia.

not just ethiopia (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/28/black_market_global_economy)

[Os Cangaceiros]

Fine. Do whatever you want in Europe.

Deep down, the Chinese don't really care.

I mean, they obviously care a little bit, or else they wouldn't have even addressed the dire issue of lazy Euro-bums languishing on beaches.

[RGacky3]

No they care alot.

[eyedrop]

Who could say no to 10% YoY growth for 3 decades?Understand what GDP says.

China could have had 0 real-growth (not that it has had) and still have a 10% GDP growth as more of it's economy is put into the market.


Lies, damned lies and statistics.

Statistics are only lies to people that don't understand them, not that media doesn't usually do it's best to get the statistics misread.

[danyboy27]

Finally, capitalists show themselves in their true forms;

Advocate of authoritarian non-democratic governements and supporter of violent worker repressions.

[Ocean Seal]

I think the labour laws are outdated. The labour laws induce sloth, indolence, rather than hardworking
The glorious Chinese Communist Party sounds like Herman Cain.
Someone call Glenn Beck, I smell a conspiracy:scared:.

[danyboy27]

The chinese governement want these austerity measures beccause it would ensure their domination over europe for the next decades.

It would be a dream coming true; the dismantling of europe industrial capability, the last remainig obstacle for the chinese state hegemony of commerce over the world.

europe would be reduced to a group of client state dependent on chinese money to keep the service economy going.

Alexander the great had the hoplite, the U.S had its airforce, and the chinese state have its rogue financial apparatus.

[ComradeMan]

The chinese governement want these austerity measures beccause it would ensure their domination over europe for the next decades.

It would be a dream coming true; the dismantling of europe industrial capability, the last remainig obstacle for the chinese state hegemony of commerce over the world.

europe would be reduced to a group of client state dependent on chinese money to keep the service economy going.

Alexander the great had the hoplite, the U.S had its airforce, and the chinese state have its rogue financial apparatus.

eZeYVIWz99I

[thriller]

After reading the quote from the OP, all I could think was: race to the bottom.

[Mather]

I don't know why you put growth in disagree quotes. You must think the Chinese economy is getting smaller

If you only look at the GDP figures then the Chinese economy is growing. But GDP is by far the most inaccurate indicator of real economic growth and how well society benefits from such growth.

Look at the small African nation of Equatorial Guinea. Since it has found oil, it's GDP per capita has shot up to $34,824 yet it is one of the poorest and most underdeveloped (in real terms) of all African nations with huge disparities of wealth and access to resources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equatorial_Guinea

I am not in doubt that China's GDP has risen but if that fails to deliver for the vast majority of the Chinese people then the 'growth' is irrelevant. An economy is allegedly supposed to serve it's people and if it cannot do that despite high levels of 'growth' then looking at GDP figures is about as much use as having a wank.



No growth for workers? http://www.usatoday.com/money/econom...bor17_ST_N.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/money/econom...bor17_ST_N.htm)


No minimum wage? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15456509 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15456509)


With the minimum wage that low China might as well have not bothered with enacting one. Also, does this chart include Chinese workers who seasonally migrate from the rural areas to work in the large cities and does it include rural workers and farmers? The poverty levels and social deprivation in the rural areas are far worse than anything you will find in the larger cities.

Don't forget that Chinese workers face much higher costs of living due to the lack of a welfare system, free healthcare, social housing and further education.


Only basis? Your words not mine....


As you failed to give any other indicators for measuring economic performance and celebrated "30 years of economic growth" in China, those words are yours and yours alone.


GDP measures everything produced in the market, so unless you think the underground economy is growing wildly in Ethiopia, we can conclude that the UK, as a country, is more economically productive than Ethiopia.

Bloody hell, are you really that economically illiterate that you would compare an advanced industrial capitalist economy like Britians with an underdeveloped agrarian semi-capitalist economy like Ethiopia?

Comparing Britain to China would be a much better example and despite China's so-called 'growth', the living standards and the wages of the average British worker are far far better than most Chinese workers could hope for.

Which goes to show that GDP figures are useless when trying to determine if a nation's economic growth actually benefits the people who make the economy run, the working class.

[RichardAWilson]

America and Europe to China: You need us.

Your economy would be in the toilet if you didn't have American and European consumers to purchase your goods.

(Which, I might add, are still competitive because of Mercantile-policies that screw us in the industrialized countries.)

With that said, this isn't a China to Europe Debate.

The Chinese Regime, much like the American Regime and some of Europe's Regimes (Britain comes to mind) are not, in any way, representing the interests of the working classes.

It's one nation's bourgeoisie speaking to another nation's bourgeoisie.