Michael Pettis Profile picture
Oct 10, 2021 11 tweets 3 min read Read on X
1/7
Very interesting article. A series of Chinese studies may be discovering something about the high-speed rail system that France had already learned: rather than boost the economies of secondary cities, being connected...

scmp.com/news/china/sci… via @SCMPNews
2/7
to the HSR may actually reduce economic activity and encourage a brain drain. Even patent applications in secondary cities have dropped significantly, according to one study, after the city was connected to a high-speed line.
3/7
If this is true, it undermines the claim that even if much of the HSR is not economically viable today, it will generate enough growth in the less economically advanced areas to become viable in the future. The value of HSR is more likely to decline than to increase.
4/7
This reinforces a point I have made many times before, including in the linked essay. The idea that concentrating investment in poorer regions will drive economic convergence is based on a confusion about what drives growth.

carnegieendowment.org/chinafinancial…
5/7
Poorer regions are usually poorer because their social, economic, legal, and cultural institutions prevent businesses and workers from being able to absorb high levels of capital productively.
6/7
In that case more investment only generates sustainable growth when these regions are relatively underinvested, and this doesn't mean relative to more advanced regions but rather relative to their own specific institutional capacity (what I call the Hirschman level).
7/7
Once each region has as much investment as it can productively absorb — and in China most regions reached that point well over a decade ago — more investment doesn't help. What it needs is more institutional reform.
1/4
The point of this thread is not to suggest that investment in HSR, or capital deepening more generally, is economically a bad idea. It is in fact often a very good idea – for example infrastructure investment in China in the 1990s, or in the US today – but we should ...
2/4
understand both the conditions under which it can accelerate economic development and those under which further economic development will not occur without the right institutional reforms, in which case further capital deepening can actually reduce future growth.
3/4
As a corollary, the longer an investment-driven growth model has proven successful, the more politically entrenched it is likely to become – that is certainly what the historical precedents suggest – but in fact the less successful it is likely to be...
4/4
in the future as it closes the gap between actual investment and the amount of investment the region can productively absorb.

• • •

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

Jun 18
1/8
Pan Gongsheng is right to warn of the dangers to the global economy posed by fiscal and regulatory problems in the country issuing the world’s main currency, but the two ways for China to protect itself from running those risks are pretty obvious.
nytimes.com/2025/06/18/bus…
2/8
One way would be to rebalance domestic demand by increasing the share of GDP that is directed to China's household sector. In that case China's trade surplus would decline, and China would no longer need to acquire huge amounts of US assets to balance weak domestic demand.
3/8
The other way is for China to balance its weak domestic demand by acquiring assets in countries other than the US. It could instead acquire European and Japanese assets, or it could acquire assets in developing countries, who could then use the inflows to boost investment.
Read 8 tweets
Jun 18
1/6
Martin Wolf's “pluto-populism”: the rich receive most of the goodies; the poor become poorer; and the fiscal deficit stays huge.

The "supply-side" argument in favor of income inequality is that because the rich save more of their income than do...
ft.com/content/31f40b…
2/6
ordinary people, who consume more of their income, a rise in income inequality pushes up total savings, which in turn pushes up investment, which in turn pushes up economic growth, whose benefits then "trickle down" to the poor, leaving everyone better off.
3/6
But this is only the case in economies in which businesses are eager to invest in a wide variety of projects but are unable to do so because savings (i.e. unconsumed resources) are scarce and the cost of capital high—i.e. fast-growing developing economies, for the most part.
Read 6 tweets
Jun 18
1/7
Caixin: "Once limited to funding new infrastructure projects, local government special bonds are increasingly being used to supplement local government budgets, repay overdue private contractors, and even to support struggling legacy PPP projects."
caixinglobal.com/2025-06-18/chi…
2/7
According to Caixin, this shift in the use of special bonds "signals a growing recognition that China’s legacy public-private partnership model — once a darling of infrastructure financing — has become a fiscal burden as local governments fall behind on payments."
3/7
I would add that it also confirms what some of us have known for over a decade—a large and growing share of infrastructure investment simply does not make economic sense, and has been pursued mainly to generate economic activity.
Read 7 tweets
Jun 18
1/4
Yicai: "Many of China’s small and medium-sized banks can no longer afford to offer interest rates that are higher than the big state-owned lenders, a strategy they used to adopt to attract more deposits."

yicaiglobal.com/news/smaller-c…
2/4
Instead, Yicai continues, "they are slashing yields to below that of the big banks as they focus on staying afloat." The article goes on to say that "many of these banks are no longer focused on growing and are instead focused on surviving."
3/4
Because bigger banks were safer and more convenient, the only way smaller banks could grow was by offering higher deposit rates. If they switch to lower deposit rates, they are likely to contract both sides of their balance sheets.
Read 4 tweets
Jun 17
1/5
According to Xinhua, "sales of household appliances, audio-visual equipment, communication devices, cultural and office supplies and furniture surged by as much as 53 percent year on year in May, contributing 1.9 percentage points to the increase."
english.news.cn/20250616/fe31b…
2/5
This suggests that the 6.4% year-on-year jump in retail sales was led by trade-in goods. In March Beijing announced a RMB 300 billion voucher program to support trade-ins, equal to roughly 0.2% of China's expected GDP in 2025.
3/5
If retail sales revert to pre-May growth rates, as is likely, I suspect this will put pressure on Beijing to announce a second such program in September or October. Without fiscal support, it is unlikely consumption can sustainably pick up the pace of growth.
Read 5 tweets
Jun 16
1/17
I'm all in favor of myth-busting but this article seems to miss the point. To my knowledge, and contrary to Sharma's claim, no one has ever argued that the consumption share of China's GDP is low because consumption has grown slowly.
ft.com/content/bf1e87…
2/17
The argument has always been that consumption and household income have grown much more slowly than GDP because of a series of explicit and implicit transfers from households that subsidized growth in investment, especially investment in manufacturing and infrastructure.
3/17
For example, the biggest decline in the consumption share of GDP occurred in the first decade of this century largely because of extremely low interest rates – highly negative in real terms – that were engineered to resolve the cleaning up of the banking system.
Read 17 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!

:(