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...
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.
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
1/8 Very interesting CNA article on Beijing's strategic pivot towards upgrading the quality of China's existing housing stock. It turns out that much of its housing stock, including much that was built in recent years, is of unacceptable quality. channelnewsasia.com/east-asia/chin…
2/8 CNA: "“This strategic pivot to ‘good housing’ is fundamentally about rebalancing the economy – shifting from speculative inventory to quality living,” Lin Han-Shen, China country director at The Asia Group, told CNA. “Restoring household confidence is central".
3/8 The article also cites the Conference Board’s Zhang Yuhan who warned that "the shift towards higher-quality housing is “likely to support confidence gradually”, but cautioned it does not resolve oversupply or developer liquidity pressures on its own."
1/6 People often say that the problem with the global trading system is mainland China, but that's not true. Taiwan, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, Singapore and many others have run similar positions. The problem is with the global trading system itself.
2/6 As long as countries like the US (and the EU soon?) continue to accommodate global saving imbalances, our current trading system allows for a kind of Kalecki paradox in which individual economies can be rewarded for behavior that undermines growth in the system as a whole.
3/6 Keynes explained this in 1944: economies that repress domestic demand in order to subsidize their manufacturing reduce overall global demand, but are able nonetheless to grow more quickly by taking a larger share of other countries' demand.
1/14
Unfortunately I don't subscribe to Krugman's substack, so I cannot comment on the whole article, but I can say that the first few paragraphs lay out the issue very accurately and with commendable simplicity. He certainly understands the main issues. open.substack.com/pub/paulkrugma…
2/14
He notes: "In the past, China achieved stunning economic growth in part through a combination of very high savings and very high investment. Its savings remain very high, but investment in China is running into diminishing returns in the face of slowing technological...
3/14
progress and a shrinking working-age population. Yet the Chinese government keeps failing to take effective steps to reduce savings and increase consumer demand. Instead, China is in effect exporting its excess savings via its massive trade surplus. It is using consumer...
1/11
Philip Coggan: "It is a mug’s game trying to predict the end of a boom with any precision. They last much longer than anyone might reasonably expect. That is true of bull markets, as well as economic advances. The reason is that markets and... ft.com/content/2ae4ac…
2/11
economies find ways to support themselves. George Soros, the well-known investor and philanthropist, has a term for it: reflexivity."
Coggan then explains that reflexivity is Soros' name for positive feedback loops embedded in economies and financial systems.
3/11
This is a very important concept that too few economists recognize and embed in their analyses, although most traders and investors understand it intuitively.
The point that Hyman Minsky would have added is that positive feedback loops are nothing mysterious.
1/7 SCMP: "As China grapples with persistent deflationary pressure, scholars from one of the country’s top universities have urged the government to take more forceful action to prevent the economy from becoming trapped in a Japan-style downward spiral." scmp.com/economy/china-…
2/7 The article continues: "“Japan’s experience has shown that once households form the expectation that prices won’t rise over the medium to long term, it becomes nearly impossible to break that mindset,” said He Xiaobei, a professor at Peking University."
3/7 She argues that Beijing should adopt a binding inflation target and make reviving price growth a top priority. She's right, but I am not sure what this means in policy terms. In the US or Europe, it would mean expanding money rapidly enough to set off price increases.
1/7 SCMP: "China is tapping the brakes on some subway expansions, including in certain affluent cities, reflecting a shift from the debt-fuelled infrastructure boom of the past to a new era of fiscal discipline and investment efficiency." scmp.com/economy/china-…
2/7 I've long argued that much of the infrastructure investment in the past decade was not economically viable. It was implemented mainly to keep economic activity from dropping, and not to create economic value, and is why the debt used to fund this investment was growing...
3/7 so much faster than the economy itself. But while there are still a few diehard analysts who insist that misallocated investment isn't a problem, it seems increasingly to have become the official point of view that it is, even if they have trouble saying it explicitly.