Generational Dynamics World View News

Discussion of Web Log and Analysis topics from the Generational Dynamics web site.
Xeraphim1

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by Xeraphim1 »

John wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 8:41 am
** 26-Jul-2021 World View: China clamps down on education stocks

The reason given is so that Chinese students won't have to work so
hard by attending so many tutoring sessions. The stated logic is that
these tutoring sessions cost money that the parents have to pay, so
that parents no longer want to have more than one child, which means
that China's new three-child policy is failing, and China is facing
demographic disaster.
An interesting article:
https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htatrit/20210528.aspx

"Chinese leaders do not like bad news, especially when it arrives earlier than expected. The initial reaction is to hide the bad news and try to delay admitting what they knew was coming. An example of this recently occurred in China where there was widespread chatter earlier in 2021 when the results of the once-a- decade national census, conducted during the last two months of 2020, were not released on time. The results were supposed to be released by early April 2021 but that did not happen. Then news leaked that the results of the census indicated the population decline had accelerated and for the first time since the 1940s, population had declined. This was not unexpected, nor was the subsequent government assertion that the leaks were false and that the delay was because of the need to further analyze the results and prepare a suitable announcement.

Tweaking official data to meet government expectations has been a major problem in China, at all levels, for a long time. Those problems began with the provincial government mishandling the financing of new businesses, infrastructure and home building.

The population decline was expected, but sometime in the late 2020s, not by 2020. The government has still not released the official data in detail, which usually means that creating a credible doctored report is taking longer than expected. The official announcement is that the decline did not take place and more proof will be made available later.

Past doctored data scandals have been a major embarrassment because those also involved massive corruption by banks, businesses and local officials. This malfeasance revealed a major banking scandal that threatened a major collapse of the financial system. This had been going on for years and explained official annual GDP growth that could not be justified by economic data analyzed by foreign economists. Chinese growth was driven by massive growth in Chinese exports. That provided data to foreign economists which allowed independent assessment of Chinese economic performance and health that made national leaders aware that there were problems at the provincial levels. This led to prosecution of a lot of senior provincial and national officials as well as bank and business managers for making bad loans and concealing the growing mountain of uncollectable debt.

The impact of the population decline was more visible. One aspect of this was a labor shortage that drove up wage costs. This reduced the cost advantage of producing goods in China. That led to other nations in Asia taking Chinese manufacturing jobs because they had more workers and lower wages. China knew it would have a growing labor shortage because of the smaller generations of Chinese produced after the “one child per family” program was instituted in the 1980s. The government eased up on the one-child policy in 2016 but it was too late. Many more affluent (than 30 years ago) Chinese women do not want to have more than one or two (or any) children and the government, like their counterparts elsewhere, has not yet found a way to compel obedience. This is a common problem with affluence and has already hit Japan and South Korea and every other industrialized nation that does not allow many foreigners to become permanent residents, much less citizens. China has always seen non-Chinese as lesser creatures, a designation many neighbors and adversaries do not appreciate. As the old saying goes, make a lot of enemies on the way up and you can expect others to hurt rather than help you when you are on the way down. That is what China faces now.

China has become increasingly alarmed at the impact of its “one-child” policy, its inability to keep things from getting worse. Chinese leaders never discussed how they would handle the obvious demographic implications of the one-child policy while several successive supreme leaders preferred to play political musical chairs and leave the problem unaddressed for their successors. Eventually one of those successors ends up the loser. But at least he can blame his weak predecessors for not doing what had to be done.

Some knowledgeable Chinese had studied the problem but realized they could not present their findings to a leadership determined to put off dealing with it. In May China announced that the leaks were false. There had been no population decline and more effort would go into dealing with this population “problem”.

Time is not on China’s side. The negative impact of the one-child policy began showing up in unmistakable ways more than a decade ago and there were numerous very obvious indicators. One of the more obvious was fewer Chinese available to fill the growing number of jobs. For example, the overall population increased 7.1 million in 2014, to 1.37 billion while the working age population declined 3.7 million. The number of Chinese over 60 increased 10 million to 212 million. All this very visible evidence was obvious in 2014 and will continue for decades. The biggest problem, though, is the growing shortage of workers. As the population ages, all those “one child” families mean there will be more elderly than the economy, and its shrinking workforce can effectively support. In 2015 there were eleven working age Chinese for every retiree. By 2050, if not earlier, there will only be two for each retiree. At that point, retirees will comprise 30 percent of the population versus over 15 percent now. Traditionally, children cared for their parents in multi-generation households. That model is dying out, and China is faced with huge pension cost increases at the same time they expect their economy to be the mightiest on the planet. In reality the largest single government expense will be the care of the elderly, and this will impose crushing taxes on those of working age and stifle economic growth. It will be more difficult to get workers for unpopular jobs. For example, the military, especially the navy, is already having problems obtaining enough qualified recruits for its smaller but far more high-tech force. The new navy spends a lot of time at sea and most young Chinese see that as an extreme hardship.

Many working age Chinese are worried about this, for there is no easy solution in sight. The population shrinkage is accompanied by another problem. Since the 1980s many of those couples forced to have only one child aborted a child if it was a female, because much more importance is attached to having a male heir. The result became obvious fifteen years ago when the first “one-child” generation started looking for wives. At that point there were 38 million more males than females in China, and the disparity is growing. The competition for wives is causing problems. Women are taking advantage of their scarcity, but men are also going to neighboring countries to buy, or even kidnap, young women to be wives. This is causing ill will with neighbors, where females are enticed or coerced (kidnapped by criminal gangs) to become wives of Chinese men who have no other options. It’s not just brides who are moving to China, millions of workers move to China each year. It’s these migrants that will become increasingly important in the next few decades for dealing with the labor shortage, but they cannot become Chinese citizens unless they can marry Chinese. China, Korea and Japan are all hostile to integrating other east Asians into their populations. It happens, but there is a social stigma for having a foreign parent or ancestor.

The affluence for hundreds of millions of Chinese was real and it did not just reduce the birth rate, it also increased the drug addiction rate. China will not release official figures but it is estimated, using arrests, drug seizures and such, that there are over 15 million addicts in China and that this is rapidly increasing. This is happening despite vigorous government anti-drug efforts. Arrests for drug offenses have increased more than ten times in the past decade yet the drugs keep coming, especially from neighbors like Burma, North Korea, Thailand and Afghanistan.

The government knew that once a census report made official the decline of the population, a lot more unwanted attention would be paid to the population problems. This will lead Chinese to take a closer look at South Korea and Japan, who enjoyed rapid economic growth a decade or more earlier than China. Japan got there first and now faces inexorable population shortages with no solution in sight. Integrating migrants into the culture is still forbidden although Japan has been forced to at least consider allowing qualified migrants to become citizens, although socially second-class ones. That will change Japanese culture, but that already happened in the aftermath of World War II and Japan thrived because of it.

South Korea is another matter, because the population decline is a decade behind Japan and the South Korean are more open to accepting qualified foreigners. Many South Koreans believe Korea will become united soon and hope this will somehow solve the population problem for a while, if ever if China does not cooperate and tolerate a unified democratic Korea as a neighbor. Europe and especially the former British colonies that became the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand all thrived by accepting migrants from everywhere and urging them to adapt to the new culture and become citizens. With a few exceptions, that population growth model was not widely accepted in Europe. But it was much more acceptable than in East Asia."

John
Posts: 11479
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by John »

** 26-Jul-2021 World View: Russia vs China
Xeraphim1 wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 9:45 am
> I will suggest that Russia would not clash with China over any of
> these other than Sakhalin and Siberia. Definitely not Manchuria,
> Tibet or Xinjiang since those are all components of China. Russia
> doesn't have strong interests in SE Asia since the relationships
> all tip toward either China or the US. There are relationships
> with India, but mostly in sales. Once upon a time Russia may have
> supported India in a war with China (1971), but those days are
> long past. India is building more of its defense equipment locally
> and would probably prefer to buy everything from non-Russia
> sources, but it still has a lot of legacy equipment to support so
> it needs to keep throwing Russia bones to keep the supply lines
> open.
I would add a couple of observations.

First, Russia's relationship with India goes far deeper than weapons
sales. In a war between India and Pakistan, China will side with
Pakistan and Russia will side with India.

Second, Russia and China have plenty of potential to clash in Central
Asia. Russia considers Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan to be
within its sphere of influence, and part of Russia's Collective
Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), but China claims some or all of
all three countries as part of its historic territory.

** 5-Jul-20 World View -- India's list of China's border disagreements
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e200705

Xeraphim1

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by Xeraphim1 »

John wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 11:39 am
** 26-Jul-2021 World View: Russia vs China
Xeraphim1 wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 9:45 am
> I will suggest that Russia would not clash with China over any of
> these other than Sakhalin and Siberia. Definitely not Manchuria,
> Tibet or Xinjiang since those are all components of China. Russia
> doesn't have strong interests in SE Asia since the relationships
> all tip toward either China or the US. There are relationships
> with India, but mostly in sales. Once upon a time Russia may have
> supported India in a war with China (1971), but those days are
> long past. India is building more of its defense equipment locally
> and would probably prefer to buy everything from non-Russia
> sources, but it still has a lot of legacy equipment to support so
> it needs to keep throwing Russia bones to keep the supply lines
> open.
I would add a couple of observations.

First, Russia's relationship with India goes far deeper than weapons
sales. In a war between India and Pakistan, China will side with
Pakistan and Russia will side with India.

Second, Russia and China have plenty of potential to clash in Central
Asia. Russia considers Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan to be
within its sphere of influence, and part of Russia's Collective
Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), but China claims some or all of
all three countries as part of its historic territory.

** 5-Jul-20 World View -- India's list of China's border disagreements
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e200705
I'm less sanguine than you over Russia coming to the aid of India in the case of a war with China. Russia/China trade is about ten times greater than Russia/India trade and Russia has a need to keep China from looking hungrily at Siberia. Stepping into a China/India fight would not be appealing to the current government. Now, if we're talking a full blown no-holds-barred war Russia might step in because at that point there are other imperatives.

I'll agree that Central Asia does have some potential for conflict but, at least so far, China does not seem to be placing that much importance on the region. Perhaps because Russia does have formal military alliances with most of those countries.

John
Posts: 11479
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by John »

** 26-Jul-2021 World View: Russia + India vs China
Xeraphim1 wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 12:58 pm
> I'm less sanguine than you over Russia coming to the aid of India
> in the case of a war with China. Russia/China trade is about ten
> times greater than Russia/India trade and Russia has a need to
> keep China from looking hungrily at Siberia. Stepping into a
> China/India fight would not be appealing to the current
> government. Now, if we're talking a full blown no-holds-barred war
> Russia might step in because at that point there are other
> imperatives.

> I'll agree that Central Asia does have some potential for conflict
> but, at least so far, China does not seem to be placing that much
> importance on the region. Perhaps because Russia does have formal
> military alliances with most of those countries.
Yeah, I'm talking about a full blown no-holds-barred war. Even if a
war between India and China starts out as a "small war," as happened
in the past Awakening and Unraveling eras, then it will soon expand to
a much larger war, in this generational Crisis era.

Beware of the "There won't be a war because it's bad for business"
argument. If that were true, there would never be a war. How many
times have I heard that China won't invade Taiwan because it's bad for
business? Or that England won't go to war with Hitler because it's
bad for business. Oh, wait.

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 1465
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by Bob Butler »

John wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 1:30 pm
Beware of the "There won't be a war because it's bad for business" argument. If that were true, there would never be a war. How many times have I heard that China won't invade Taiwan because it's bad for business? Or that England won't go to war with Hitler because it's bad for business. Oh, wait.
Somewhere between the invention of the machine gun and the nuke, aggressive war of conquest became not cost effective. There do exist slow learners. It is far too soon to abandon containment. Still, how well did conquest work for Hitler and his Axis allies? I see the CCP as bigger on brinksmanship and bluffing than actual for real conquest attempts. We will have to see if that continues. Hong Kong seems more likely than Taiwan. They should have as much reluctance to open a sea war with the US as we have to engage in another land war in Asia.

Xeraphim1

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by Xeraphim1 »

Bob Butler wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 6:10 pm
John wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 1:30 pm
Beware of the "There won't be a war because it's bad for business" argument. If that were true, there would never be a war. How many times have I heard that China won't invade Taiwan because it's bad for business? Or that England won't go to war with Hitler because it's bad for business. Oh, wait.
Somewhere between the invention of the machine gun and the nuke, aggressive war of conquest became not cost effective. There do exist slow learners. It is far too soon to abandon containment. Still, how well did conquest work for Hitler and his Axis allies? I see the CCP as bigger on brinksmanship and bluffing than actual for real conquest attempts. We will have to see if that continues. Hong Kong seems more likely than Taiwan. They should have as much reluctance to open a sea war with the US as we have to engage in another land war in Asia.
It's hard to say because the CCP does seem to be losing its touch on reality. If it's facing humiliation due to overreaching I unfortunately can see them looking at nuclear weapons as an answer. It doesn't even need to be an existential crisis, just a severe loss of face. On the other hand, nuclear weapons really do change the equations and the consequences are much more severe than they used to be.

John
Posts: 11479
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by John »

** 27-Jul-2021 World View: Chinese Communists losing touch with reality
Xeraphim1 wrote:
Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:25 am
> It's hard to say because the CCP does seem to be losing its touch
> on reality. If it's facing humiliation due to overreaching I
> unfortunately can see them looking at nuclear weapons as an
> answer. It doesn't even need to be an existential crisis, just a
> severe loss of face. On the other hand, nuclear weapons really do
> change the equations and the consequences are much more severe
> than they used to be.
I see Xi Jinping exhibiting the same insanity that Mao Zedong showed
with the catastrophic Great Leap Forward, which killed tens of
millions of innocent Chinese and destroyed China's economy for
decades, for absolutely no reason at all. That's what happens in a
dictatorship. Once the dictator makes a stupid decision, then anyone
opposed gets killed. And I've referred to the Great Leap Forward as
the stupidest policy of any country in the history of the world.

So now in the last few weeks, we suddenly see the Chinese Communists
doing one incredibly stupid thing after another. As I described in my
recent article, they're showering Taiwan airspace with war planes,
they're threatening Japan with nuclear war, and they're specifically
rejecting any accomodations to established international law.

In my article on Japan and China, I said that in the past the two countries
pretended to like each other, but they've stopped any such pretense.
The same is true of the Chinese Communists in other areas.

Here's an excerpt from an article from Beijing mouthpiece Global Times:
> "US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman began her
> visit to China on Sunday. One day later, Chinese State Councilor
> and Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with her, while Chinese Vice
> Foreign Minister Xie Feng held talks with her. A Chinese Foreign
> Ministry spokesperson said that the talks were in-depth, frank,
> and beneficial to the relationship between the two countries.

> Xie's expression of strong dissatisfaction with the US, as seen in
> a briefing of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, drew praise on the
> internet. Xie sharply criticized the US' "competitive,
> collaborative and adversarial rhetoric," in which "the real
> emphasis is on the adversarial aspect, as the collaborative aspect
> is just an expediency, and the competitive aspect is a narrative
> trap." He said the US wants to "do bad things and get good
> results." "How is that ever possible?" asked Xie. He then
> continued by criticizing the US' arrogant approach in dealing with
> other countries "from a position of strength." Xie even called the
> US the "inventor, and patent and intellectual property owner" of
> coercive diplomacy.

> In the past, China had stressed on creating a good atmosphere for
> China-US talks. Even if the two sides had very heated discussions,
> China might not inform the public about such talks. This time,
> China quickly made public Xie's tough statement at the Tianjin
> talks. This has solidified an important posture adjustment in
> China's approach to dealing with the US that began with the
> Anchorage talks: We will no longer make unilateral efforts to
> maintain the public opinion atmosphere in China-US relations.

> The basis for such changes is that Chinese society has become fed
> up with the bossy US and we hold no more illusion that China and
> the US would substantially improve ties in the foreseeable
> future. The Chinese public strongly supports the government to
> safeguard national dignity in its ties with the US and firmly push
> back the various provocations from the US. In the face of the
> malicious China containment and confrontational policy adopted by
> the two recent US administrations, the Chinese people are willing
> to form a united front, together bear the consequences of not
> yielding to the US, and win for the country's future through
> struggles.

> In other words, Chinese society would unconditionally support
> whatever tough counterattacks the Chinese government would launch
> in the face of US-initiated conflicts in all directions toward
> China. The US should abandon forever the idea of changing China's
> system and policies through sanctions, containment and
> intimidation."
This makes the exact point that I want to make -- that in the past the
Chinese Communists pretended to follow international law while, in
practice, they ignored it and violated it with impunity, but demanded
that the West always comply.

But now they're saying that they won't pretend anymore. They consider
established international law to be evil, and to be directed at
China's containment.

This is just one of an extremely dramatic series of policy changes that the
Chinese Communists have implemented recently.

And the Global Times article quoted above says one more thing that's
extremely significant: "The Chinese public strongly supports the
government to safeguard national dignity in its ties with the US and
firmly push back the various provocations from the US."

This validates the concern that the Communists are not "ahead of their
skis," but that their nationalistic, xenophobic, belligerent,
militaristic view of the West is supported by the public. This situation
is dangerous in the extreme.

Yesterday I wrote a post about how China, with the stroke of a pen,
crippled the entire $120 billion tutoring and education industry.
These are a problem for the Chinese Communists for two reasons.
First, they're private, non-Socialist businesses, and second, they
provide China data to hedge fund investors in the United States.

Analysts are expecting the Chinese Communists to do the same to other
industries. There's a feeling of "waiting for the other shoe to
drop."

Now we've found out that China is building a new nuclear missile silo
field. Assuming that each of China's missile silos is loaded with a
MIRVed DF-41 warheads (assuming 3 warheads per missile), then China
could launch more than 875 nuclear warheads.

The net net of all this is that Xi Jinping's policies are going to
be as disastrous as Mao Zedong's, but instead of being catastrophic
just for China, they'll be catastrophic for the whole world.

Image
  • New missile silo fields are deep inside China (Federation of American Scientists)


---- Sources:

-- On US arrogance, China should be more direct: Global Times
editorial
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202107/1229704.shtml
(Global Times, Beijing, 26-Jul-2021)

-- China Is Building A Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field
https://fas.org/blogs/security/2021/07/ ... ilo-field/
(Federation Of American Scientists, 26-Jul-2021)

Guest

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by Guest »

England's new aircraft carrier entered the South China Sea yesterday. Along with some of England most advanced warships. So this, I take it, is not a good sign. Maybe NATO plans to bring the war to China?

John
Posts: 11479
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by John »

** 27-Jul-2021 World View: British aircraft carrier in South China Sea
Guest wrote:
Tue Jul 27, 2021 12:00 pm
> England's new aircraft carrier entered the South China Sea
> yesterday. Along with some of England most advanced warships. So
> this, I take it, is not a good sign. Maybe NATO plans to bring the
> war to China?
Image
  • British aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth


-- British aircraft carrier ignores Chinese warnings and enters South
China Sea
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... china-sea/
(UK Defense Journal, 27-Jul-2021)
> "Aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth and her Carrier
> Strike Group have entered the South China Sea, a region largely
> claimed by China.

> The aircraft carrier and her escorts were recently in Singapore
> before entering the South China Sea. ...

> Chinese defence spokesman Tan Kefei [8]was quoted in the [9]South
> China Morning Post as saying:

> “The Chinese side believes that the South China Sea should not
> become a sea of great power rivalry dominated by weapons and
> warships. The real source of militarisation in the South China Sea
> comes from countries outside this region sending their warships
> thousands of kilometres from home to flex muscles. The Chinese
> military will take necessary measures to safeguard its
> sovereignty, security and development interest as well as peace
> and stability in the South China Sea.” ...

> Back at the start of the month, [11]Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab
> told MPs that “It’s absolutely right we exercise and defend the
> rights, and we do so from the Ukrainian territorial sea to the
> South China Sea” after discussions on a British warship
> [12]sailing through Ukrainian territory claimed by Russia.

> Yesterday, ships from the UK’s Carrier Strike Group performed an
> exercise with the Republic of Singapore Navy."


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 59 guests