1/10
I agree, Adam, that what happened in Japan is a very important story, but I would add that your graph shows Japanese government debt, which is only half the debt story. In the 1980s, when Japan was still growing quickly, private-sector debt grew more rapidly than...
2/10
Japanese government debt. In the 1990s, however, when Japanese GDP growth had pretty much dropped to zero, private-sector debt began to shrink as a share of GDP, just as government debt began its rapid growth. tradingeconomics.com/japan/private-…
3/10
I think, in other words, that while there was growth in Japanese debt after 1990-92, there was also a lot of shifting of debt from private-sector to government balance sheets. The reason I think this is important is because of what it might tell us about China.
4/10
Until the early 1990s Japanese GDP growth – which was unbalanced towards investment rather than consumption, although not nearly to China's extent – had become heavily reliant on rising private and public sector debt. Because in the late 1980s much of this went to fund...
5/10
non-productive investment, the country's total debt-to-GDP ratio began to grow rapidly (when debt is used to fund productive investment, debt grows, but debt to GDP doesn't).
Once the growth in Japanese debt began to reach limits in the early 1990s, however, GDP mostly...
6/10
stopped growing.
After that Japan partially rebalanced at the same time that debt shifted from private-sector balance sheets to public-sector balance sheets. I think these two were related. The effective shifting of debt from private to public balance sheets may have...
7/10
been one way that income shifted to households. Their income grew more slowly than GDP before 1990s but more quickly after, which is perhaps why the collapse in Japanese GDP growth never seemed to bother Japanese households as much as you might otherwise have expected.
8/10
The implication for China is that it can maintain rapid GDP growth only as long as debt can rise much faster than GDP, but once the growth in debt slows, GDP growth must drop sharply. So far this probably isn't controversial, but what is more complicated is...
9/10
to understand what will happen next. Japan, I think, represents one way China can evolve, with a long period of very low growth as it shifts, rather than resolves, the debt burden.
In the end resolving the debt burden just means recognizing and allocating...
10/10
the costs of writing it down, which is politically painful. Shifting it onto government balance sheets is a way of spreading out the allocation of costs over a very long period, although this may come at the cost of much slower growth.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/4 WSJ: "The number of ride-hailing drivers in China tripled to 7.5 million in the four years to 2024, even though the number of rides grew only by about 60% during the same period, government data shows." wsj.com/world/asia/14-…
2/4 By shifting into the gig economy, workers reduce overall unemployment numbers without increasing the the total amount of wages workers receive. This is one of the reasons consumption growth has been so weak.
To boost consumption growth, Beijing must figure out how to...
3/4 get total wages to rise much more quickly, although it must do this without further undermining already-unprofitable businesses. But if it continues to subsidize business profits while also subsidizing wage growth, the rise in debt will only accelerate.
1/10
President Macron says "We must acknowledge that these imbalances are both the result of weak EU productivity and China’s policy of export-driven growth."
2/10
Countries don't run trade deficits because of low productivity, any more than they run surpluses because of high productivity. That is not at all what global trade imbalances around the world tell us, and that is not why countries have lower or higher saving rates.
3/10
American productivity, to take one obvious example, is higher than that of Europeans, and several times higher than that of the Chinese, and yet it is the US that runs huge deficits and China, with the highest saving rate in the world, that runs huge trade surpluses.
1/8 It's hard to find anything good in the November economic data for China, just as it is hard to find anything new to say. All the important indicators continue to weaken, as they have throughout the year, in some cases even decelerating further. english.news.cn/20251215/a5915…
2/8 Retail sales, for example, were expected to grow a very disappointing 2.9% year on year in November. In fact they only grew 1.3%.
For all the talk of a greater role for consumption in driving growth, in the first 11 months of the year, retail sales were up just 4.0%.
3/8 Meanwhile industrial output rose 4.8% in November, a little below expectation and well below the 6.0% growth in the first 11 months of the year.
For me the main worry is the gap between the two, with the former so far this year growing 2 percentage points more slowly than...
1/8 Caixin: "While concerns about weak demand and external uncertainties persist, this year's Central Economic Work Conference, which concluded on Thursday, marked a shift in tone. The official readout framed China's core economic challenge as... caixinglobal.com/2025-12-12/chi…
2/8 a “prominent contradiction between strong supply and weak demand” — a structural issue rather than just insufficient consumption."
"The change" Caixin writes, "suggests Beijing sees supply-side imbalances, not just inadequate consumption, as a constraint."
3/8 Perhaps, but the only way you reduce a “contradiction between strong supply and weak demand” is either by reducing GDP growth, which Beijing doesn't seem to want, by increasing growth in consumption, which for all its efforts Beijing has been unable to do, or by increasing...
1/4 WSJ: "President Trump’s barrage of tariff increases threatened to chill global trade flows, but commercial exchanges continued to increase as most of the international commerce system functions as it did before the onslaught."
via @WSJwsj.com/economy/trade/…
2/4 Contrary to what WSJ says, Trump's tariffs never really threatened to "chill global trade flows" except in the view of those (including far too many economists) who mistakenly thought of trade in incremental terms rather than in systemic terms.
3/4 As I wrote two years ago, the word "resilience" was going to be used over and over to describe trade as Trump's tariffs shifted trade and trade imbalances around without fundamentally changing them. That's because the only way the US can cause a reduction in its trade...
1/4 The IMF formally recognizes that it is a depreciating RMB, not rising manufacturing efficiency, that drives China's growing trade surplus. ft.com/content/9c92aa…
2/4 That's because a depreciating currency is both a subsidy for manufacturing (and tradable goods) and a tax on consumption. It works by reducing the household share of GDP, especially when reinforced by other production subsidies paid for directly or indirectly by households.
3/4 The net result of boosting manufacturing with subsidies and restraining consumption with taxes is to force the production of manufactured goods to grow faster than consumption – which also means forcing up the saving rate.