Michael Pettis Profile picture
Sep 13, 2020 11 tweets 3 min read Read on X
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
 

Keep Current with Michael Pettis

Michael Pettis Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @michaelxpettis

Jul 26
1/7
FT: "According to economic theory, productivity and real wages should grow in tandem, with the benefits of new technology being shared with the workers who produce the stuff. But in the US, Europe and Japan, pay growth has decoupled from...
ft.com/content/974120…
2/7
productivity growth, with the latter having pulled ahead."

Even more so in China.

The problem is that in advanced and developing economies in which investment isn't constrained by scarce saving, consumption must rise in line with productivity to justify higher production.
3/7
If it doesn't, inventory will pile up as production exceeds demand, and producers will eventually cut back, and so lay off workers. Unemployed workers, of course, will further reduce their consumption thus exacerbating the demand problem.
Read 7 tweets
Jul 23
1/9
This interesting Soumaya Keynes piece makes several important points about the success (or lack) of Trump's tariff policies, but I think she makes one important mistake in assessing the impact of tariffs that too many other analysts also make.
ft.com/content/7b5303…
2/9
She seems to argue that tariffs are ineffective to the extent that they are "paid for" by American consumers rather than by foreign exporters.

But this gets it backwards. Tariffs are in fact effective mainly to the extent that they are paid for by American consumers.
3/9
That's because if tariffs are to succeed in rebalancing the economy towards more domestic production and fewer foreign imports, they must do so by changing the income balance between domestic production and domestic consumption.
Read 9 tweets
Jul 23
1/6
FT: "“This is a structural transformation of Japan,” says an economist who has tracked the country’s three-decade-long struggle to emerge from deflation. “It is a shift from being a demand-shortage economy to a supply-shortage economy.”"
ft.com/content/397c04…
2/6
Being a "supply-shortage economy" is not a good thing either, because the only sustainable way to grow consumption is to grow production, but it is important that it took Japan 35 years of weak growth and a collapse in its share of global manufacturing for it to adjust.
3/6
It's more "normal" for countries with excessively low consumption shares to adjust much more quickly and brutally, but while "slow" Japanese-style adjustments are often economically much more costly over the longer term, socially and politically they are much less costly.
Read 6 tweets
Jul 16
1/6
Good SCMP article that illustrates one dilemma facing the Chinese economy: "While official manufacturing data for June showed continued expansion, electronics exporters in the region – one of China’s biggest industrial areas and a bellwether for the...
sc.mp/l1qix?utm_sour…
2/6
national economy – said last week that a pickup in orders had yet to lift their bottom lines."

Or, as a friend who owns a medium-sized manufacturing business in China puts it: "Why is it so hard to find the happy people you'd expect to find in an economy growing at 5%?"
3/6
Analysts often say that China's soaring exports and its widening trade surplus are the bright spots for the economy, but it's not as simple as that. These are brights spots in the sense that they contribute to economic activity and allow China to keep production growing.
Read 6 tweets
Jul 8
1/10
The FT's Edward White argues that China urgently needs someone to close down huge swathes of China's inefficient and money-losing industries, much as former premier Zhu Rongji did in the late 1990s and early 2000s.
ft.com/content/9c4fe0…
2/10
In the former case, he writes, "the cuts ripped through China’s north-eastern rustbelt. Thousands of mines, steel mills and other industrial sites were shut for good. An estimated 30mn to 40mn workers lost their jobs."
3/10
White notes that today, "the share of lossmaking industrial businesses jumped from about 10 per cent in 2010 to nearly 25 per cent last year. This dynamic exists across everything from steel and cement to cars, computer chips and robots."
Read 10 tweets
Jun 19
1/8
FT: "That said, “the weakness in consumption is more structural”, Logan Wright added."

He's right. Every month there are incremental explanations as to why consumption was weak "last month", but the problem is not temporary. It is structural.
ft.com/content/7db729…
2/8
The property sector can stabilize, the Iran war can end, the weather can get better, a new toy fad can emerge, Beijing can launch another consumption program, but while these may all cause temporary increases in consumption, overall consumption will continue to struggle.
3/8
The reason, as I've argued for years, is that China's low consumption is not an accident or an oversight. It is fundamental to the way the economy works. It is China's low household share of GDP that drives both its low consumption share and the "competitiveness" of...
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(