Org Mobile Site
Thread: Chinese ghost-towns
Everyone who says China is a legitimate threat seems to forget that it has its own major problems as well.
Looks like there simply aren't enough Chinese people, this is all newly build. Major problems I dunno, seems to me they are confident that they are running low capacity atm
Maybe they plan on relocating all those ethnic groups they have ticked off so far?
No necessarily, I can see an alternative case wherein these cities are not a “problem” merely part of a range of solutions to other problems. These projects provide jobs and may help drive property prices down. This can be seen as killing three birds with one stone: provide jobs, provide housing, alleviate population pressure on the big cities. It doesn't matter that these cities are empty now, or will remain so for the foreseeable future.
Consider:
So a few ghost towns means work for thousands, and might alleviate the population pressure and other problems associated with the big cities.
On the other hand this might well be construction contracts of the sort which merely serve to make a select group of officials that much richer on the Renminbi.
Consider:
- There are “hordes” of Chinese in cities like Beijing unable to get a job because they are “outsiders” so even if they have good degrees Chinese culture practically excludes them from a proper job. In these new cities, this doesn't apply (or not to such a degree).
- These “hordes” also are young people looking to settle.
- These young people have no way they are able to afford their own property in even remotely populous cities.
- The cities where they usually migrate to (Beijing, Shanghai etc.) have mounting and increasingly hard to ignore problems when it comes to pollution, sanitation and traffic congestion. You think the Netherlands or the UK or France or Italy or Arizona or Texas whatever is full and we can't have more immigrants (not saying you do, just in general), look at those cities to see how much worse it can get.
- This combination provides your traditional basis for social unrest, riots, and popular revolt.
So a few ghost towns means work for thousands, and might alleviate the population pressure and other problems associated with the big cities.
On the other hand this might well be construction contracts of the sort which merely serve to make a select group of officials that much richer on the Renminbi.
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios:
No necessarily, I can see an alternative case wherein these cities are not a “problem” merely part of a range of solutions to other problems. These projects provide jobs and may help drive property prices down. This can be seen as killing three birds with one stone: provide jobs, provide housing, alleviate population pressure on the big cities. It doesn't matter that these cities are empty now, or will remain so for the foreseeable future.
Consider:
So a few ghost towns means work for thousands, and might alleviate the population pressure and other problems associated with the big cities.
On the other hand this might well be construction contracts of the sort which merely serve to make a select group of officials that much richer on the Renminbi.
But it also exacerbates one problem: environmental/ecological damage.No necessarily, I can see an alternative case wherein these cities are not a “problem” merely part of a range of solutions to other problems. These projects provide jobs and may help drive property prices down. This can be seen as killing three birds with one stone: provide jobs, provide housing, alleviate population pressure on the big cities. It doesn't matter that these cities are empty now, or will remain so for the foreseeable future.
Consider:
- There are “hordes” of Chinese in cities like Beijing unable to get a job because they are “outsiders” so even if they have good degrees Chinese culture practically excludes them from a proper job. In these new cities, this doesn't apply (or not to such a degree).
- These “hordes” also are young people looking to settle.
- These young people have no way they are able to afford their own property in even remotely populous cities.
- The cities where they usually migrate to (Beijing, Shanghai etc.) have mounting and increasingly hard to ignore problems when it comes to pollution, sanitation and traffic congestion. You think the Netherlands or the UK or France or Italy or Arizona or Texas whatever is full and we can't have more immigrants (not saying you do, just in general), look at those cities to see how much worse it can get.
- This combination provides your traditional basis for social unrest, riots, and popular revolt.
So a few ghost towns means work for thousands, and might alleviate the population pressure and other problems associated with the big cities.
On the other hand this might well be construction contracts of the sort which merely serve to make a select group of officials that much richer on the Renminbi.
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name:
But it also exacerbates one problem: environmental/ecological damage.
True. But I'm not sure how much that is really a concern in Chinese decision making. On a central level they're certainly acutely aware of these problems and their impact (seeing as how vulnerable Chinese agriculture & food supply will be as a result), but how much of that awareness at the top trickles down & translates into concern on the local level?But it also exacerbates one problem: environmental/ecological damage.
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios:
True. But I'm not sure how much that is really a concern in Chinese decision making. On a central level they're certainly acutely aware of these problems and their impact (seeing as how vulnerable Chinese agriculture & food supply will be as a result), but how much of that awareness at the top trickles down & translates into concern on the local level?
Probably not much, because local provinces don't want rebellions over a lack of jobs any more than the central government does except they don't have the same national perspective the central does. This is in my opinion a good possibility for China to begin to develop a major weakness due to their over ambition and labor constraints (don't want them to cause rebel). Which is why I say in the first place that China is not going to be the threat everyone thinks it will be. No country can have it all, so soon. By the time their industry expands enough to employ more than 95% of the labor population, it will be wreaking havoc on the natural environments all up and down the east coast, which will end up destabilizing the region all over again.True. But I'm not sure how much that is really a concern in Chinese decision making. On a central level they're certainly acutely aware of these problems and their impact (seeing as how vulnerable Chinese agriculture & food supply will be as a result), but how much of that awareness at the top trickles down & translates into concern on the local level?
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name:
Probably not much, because local provinces don't want rebellions over a lack of jobs any more than the central government does except they don't have the same national perspective the central does. This is in my opinion a good possibility for China to begin to develop a major weakness due to their over ambition and labor constraints (don't want them to cause rebel). Which is why I say in the first place that China is not going to be the threat everyone thinks it will be. No country can have it all, so soon. By the time their industry expands enough to employ more than 95% of the labor population, it will be wreaking havoc on the natural environments all up and down the east coast, which will end up destabilizing the region all over again.
When considering that TA's explanation makes even more sense, for these rebelious factors plenty of places to start a new life.Probably not much, because local provinces don't want rebellions over a lack of jobs any more than the central government does except they don't have the same national perspective the central does. This is in my opinion a good possibility for China to begin to develop a major weakness due to their over ambition and labor constraints (don't want them to cause rebel). Which is why I say in the first place that China is not going to be the threat everyone thinks it will be. No country can have it all, so soon. By the time their industry expands enough to employ more than 95% of the labor population, it will be wreaking havoc on the natural environments all up and down the east coast, which will end up destabilizing the region all over again.
These Ghost Towns/Cities are no different to the idea of Ghost Estates in Ireland probably caused by a hyper property market that allowed crooked property developers and crooked politicians to feed of the public trough.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
When considering that TA's explanation makes even more sense, for these rebelious factors plenty of places to start a new life.
I don't understand what you have said.When considering that TA's explanation makes even more sense, for these rebelious factors plenty of places to start a new life.
People have been saying China's bubble will end for years and yet it keeps going. I guess people want it to be that way, particularly the economic elite. That's because China doesn't fit into their tidy neoliberal argument and they can't stomach that a country with an incredibly centralised government and strong government economic intervention can be successful, which goes against their tidy neoliberal theory of how the world should be.
Originally Posted by tibilicus:
People have been saying China's bubble will end for years and yet it keeps going. I guess people want it to be that way, particularly the economic elite. That's because China doesn't fit into their tidy neoliberal argument and they can't stomach that a country with an incredibly centralised government and strong government economic intervention can be successful, which goes against their tidy neoliberal theory of how the world should be.
China's bubble isn't going to end for a long time as long as the conditions are all met. People just think that the conditions are going to change soon and China will suffer a downturn for it. For example, China needs to make millions of new jobs every year so the immigrants coming from the western provinces don't rebel due to a lack of jobs. People thought that the economic downturn would limit the amount of jobs China would be able to create, but it didn't. China simply pulled out the hire mass amounts of people to do meaningless work tactic and kept the job creation rate high.People have been saying China's bubble will end for years and yet it keeps going. I guess people want it to be that way, particularly the economic elite. That's because China doesn't fit into their tidy neoliberal argument and they can't stomach that a country with an incredibly centralised government and strong government economic intervention can be successful, which goes against their tidy neoliberal theory of how the world should be.
Those ghost towns seem like a misallocation and waste of resources (though perhaps they will be populated in the future) and a property bubble, if the housing has been bought. The Chinese government (or governments, since the provinces on down can, to some extent, do what they want) can afford to invest money in some uneconomically viable projects (or "lose" it through corruption, mismanagement, etc), but I doubt that it can go on forever. Eventually the white elephants will weigh down the system, along with the ageing population.
China's biggest long term problem is the massive ageing of the population. The 1 child policy, as well as the high cost of raising children, means that the population is going to shrink, and fast in the future. The tax base and number of workers will shrink alarmingly, and the government will have to figure out what to do with and how to look after the vast number (and high % of the population) of oldies.
The government is going to need to save while it can. Government revenue is not going to stay sky high forever...
China's biggest long term problem is the massive ageing of the population. The 1 child policy, as well as the high cost of raising children, means that the population is going to shrink, and fast in the future. The tax base and number of workers will shrink alarmingly, and the government will have to figure out what to do with and how to look after the vast number (and high % of the population) of oldies.
The government is going to need to save while it can. Government revenue is not going to stay sky high forever...
Thread Ratings provided by
Thread Ratings (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO