1/ They've said this many times before, Noah, but things have been getting consistently worse, not better. The amount of debt it takes to generate a unit of GDP has been growing rapidly, even as GDP growth has slowed, and within Beijing there is a fierce debate about whether...
2/ or not they should take aggressive steps to get debt under control, even if this results in much slower growth and a rise in unemployment. Last year for example there was a big debate over whether to target 6% GDP growth or something much lower. If they did not think the...
3/ debt were a serious problem, and if they believed that Chinese growth was healthy, real and meaningful, why would they even bother having this debate?
The biggest disagreement I have with the Economist, I would say, is over their failure to understand the sources of...
4/ Chinese debt and why the debt burden matters. They seem to think that the fact that China has avoided a financial crisis means that debt isn't that big of a problem, whereas I would argue that China was never likely to have a financial crisis, not because debt isn't a...
5/ problem but rather because financial crises are balance-sheet events, and with its closed banking system and strong regulators, Beijing can restructure liabilities at will and so can quite easily prevent a balance-sheet crisis.
The real test is whether it is possible for...
6/ China to maintain high growth rates without much faster growth in the debt that must fund huge amounts of non-productive investment. These two are related, of course, because if most debt goes to fund investment, and if the investment is productive, there is no way a...
7/ country's debt-to-GDP ratio can grow so rapidly and for so long.
But if anything is clear, it is that China simply cannot tolerate any slowdown in the growth in debt without suffering a very, very sharp slowdown in GDP growth. We know from the history of investment-driven...
8/ growth "miracles" that the problem always arises once total debt stops growing faster than GDP. In that case the country either adjusts in the form of a crisis or in the form of "lost decades" of much slower growth, and a considerable part of that adjustment consists of...
9/ writing down years and years of misallocated investment that was capitalized when it should have been expensed (similar to what Galbraith referred to as the "bezzle").
That, by the way, is one of the main differences between growing debt in China and growing debt in...
10/ the US, Europe and elsewhere. In the former case the expenditures are capitalized and show up as increases in wealth, but not in the latter cases.
We have no idea of how long China can sustain this growth in debt, but we also know that the longer it goes on, the more...
11/ difficult the adjustment will be. Until then, nothing has really changed, in my opinion.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/9 I usually agree with Martin Wolf, but here I think he is conflating two very different things. The problem with the US role in the global trading system is not that a given unit of manufacturing, over time, employs...
via @ftft.com/content/aee57e…
2/9 progressively fewer workers. It is that, over time, the share of manufacturing in US GDP and that of other advanced deficit economies is declining much faster than the manufacturing share in advanced surplus economies.
3/9 This is a different thing altogether. As I explain in the linked article, the declining manufacturing share of US GDP is neither "natural", nor is it the function of US industrial policy. Instead it is the near-automatic result of the US role in... carnegieendowment.org/china-financia…
1/7 Yicai: "China’s local government debts are mainly a result of capital expenditure, which supported the construction of a large number of transportation, water conservancy, and energy projects. These assets generate sustainable income, and they...
2/7 not only provide strong support for high-quality economic development but are also important sources of debt repayment funds."
This is (or at least it used to be) the most common explanation of why rising debt at the local-government level was not a problem.
3/7 According to this view, because the debt was used to fund capital investment, and because the economic benefits of capital investment were greater than the cost of the resources it employed, the economy was better off. Borrowing, in other words, made provinces richer.
2/10
The article goes on to explain his logic: "Owning the world’s dominant currency has helped hold down US borrowing costs and allowed the US government to take on debt that’s much bigger than its annual economic output without having to pay a premier to creditors."
3/10
But the role of the dollar doesn't "allow" the US to take on huge amounts of debt. It forces the US to take on huge amounts of debt, precisely to counter the impact of its having to absorb excess savings from the rest of the world as it acts as consumer of last resort.
1/7 Caixin: "“A growing consensus is emerging around strengthening demand-side management, with macroeconomic policies shifting from an investment-led focus to a balanced approach that gives equal priority to consumption and investment, with greater...
2/7 emphasis on consumption,” said an expert close to the PBOC."
This would be good for China if it were to happen, but we've been talking about this for years now, and there has been an almost astonishing lack of followthrough.
3/7 Unfortunately I think there is still a lot of confusion about what it means. Last week I spoke to a senior economist who is very close to policymakers, and he explained that China is determined to boost consumption, but, he said, the most efficient way to do it is to...
2/7 Unfortunately, there will be little change. I say "unfortunately" because if foreigners purchased fewer dollar assets with the their excess savings, it would better for the US economy (although not better for Wall Street, which would hate to see a less dominant dollar).
3/7 But the problem for China isn't whether or not it should continue holding most of its foreign assets in the US. It made the decision to reduce its dollar holdings long ago (probably in 2008-09), but that decision is proving impossible to execute.
1/10
This Bloomberg article illustrates the problem China and the world face: "Steel exports from China hit the highest level since 2015, risking further frictions with trade partners as Chinese mills boost overseas shipments amid weak domestic demand." bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
2/10
Both sides are in a very difficult position. China has shown itself completely unable to boost the domestic consumption share of GDP, even as it continues to maintain economic activity the only way it knows how – by boosting domestic production.
3/10
That's why it must export the balance. It it can't, it will be forced to close down production and fire workers, in which case China's rebalancing towards a greater role for domestic consumption will involve a fall in consumption and a greater fall in production (GDP).