AsiaFinest Forum
Ad: 123Designing.com

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Doesn't the fact that China is Communist...
Made in China
post Dec 15 2009, 08:42 PM
Post #1


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,661
Joined: 25-April 04




Short summary:

China's sporatic growth is dependent on copying the Western model of capitalism with Chinese characteristics.

100 years of development in nearly 10 years since China didn't need to pioneer via trial-&-error.

Deng Xiaoping's market reforms (Guangdong model) based on Special Economic Zones like southern boomtowns like Shenzhen where in fact small-scale copies of the Hong Kong's free market economic models derived from the British.

Question 1: Will China be competitive after adopting a Western style game like capitalism?

Question 2: Will the West be force to migrate and adapt to capitalism with Chinese characteristics if they want to do business in China.

China's official policy right now is to mimic the success of the West as quickly as possible and then innovate. (100 years of development in nearly 10 years)

Question 3: How can China out-innovate the West at it's own game after China is on par with Western rivals? (after it is done implementing successful reform?)

I'm only saying this because I don't think China is as innovative as .... say the US... lol.

This post has been edited by Made in China: Dec 15 2009, 08:45 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phop
post Dec 15 2009, 10:22 PM
Post #2


AF Addict
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 689
Joined: 3-December 09




QUOTE (Made in China @ Dec 15 2009, 08:42 PM) *
Short summary:

China's sporatic growth is dependent on copying the Western model of capitalism with Chinese characteristics.

100 years of development in nearly 10 years since China didn't need to pioneer via trial-&-error.

Deng Xiaoping's market reforms (Guangdong model) based on Special Economic Zones like southern boomtowns like Shenzhen where in fact small-scale copies of the Hong Kong's free market economic models derived from the British.

Question 1: Will China be competitive after adopting a Western style game like capitalism?

Question 2: Will the West be force to migrate and adapt to capitalism with Chinese characteristics if they want to do business in China.

China's official policy right now is to mimic the success of the West as quickly as possible and then innovate. (100 years of development in nearly 10 years)

Question 3: How can China out-innovate the West at it's own game after China is on par with Western rivals? (after it is done implementing successful reform?)

I'm only saying this because I don't think China is as innovative as .... say the US... lol.


Oh really? so tell me! how many Asian scientist are behind the scene in western innovative areas coming up with the latest breakthrough in science and technology that drives the west economy. By the way I am planning to go back to Asia in the future bringing my knowledge and innovation with me, so that everything that I innovate will be consider innovation coming out of Asia, by then you wont have f@g in the west talking $hit about how weak Asian innovation is. Who cares what innovation comes out of the west, I want to know who are the people behind that comes up with all these stuff, Silicon Valley would be consider a wasteland without Smart Asians.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Made in China
post Dec 16 2009, 02:50 PM
Post #3


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,661
Joined: 25-April 04






Freedom of flow of information, liberal academic freedom on research publications in China is relatively restricted compared to the United States.

The key point I'm trying to make is. Given state censorship and state grips on freedom of flow of information, How can China out innovate the United States in financial sophistication and financial instruments (EXAMPLE: complex over leveraged loans repackaged into derivatives)?

One of the key reasons Shanghai is unpopular with foreign investors (let alone the fact that foreign investors aren't allowed to invest in the mainland stock markets) is because of Shanghai's lack financial products like risk-mitigating derivatives for sophisticated investors who want to hedge bets in a volatile stock market.

Once Shanghai achieves these fundamental tools such as derivatives include options and swaps in bond and foreign exchange markets and margin trading and short selling in the stock market.

MY question is: How can China invent it's own financial instruments (innovation) for sophisticated investors after it has fully adopted Western model systems in the U.S. and Europe?

Why is this important to innovate? A market leader must always invent new financial products/instruments in order to lure investors. China must always maintain it's financial competitive edge (after fully assimilating the Western capitalist model) by offer new sophisitcated instruments instead of simply copying them into the Chinese economy.

EXAMPLE: Hong Kong's competitive edge lies in innovative financial instruments which gives sauvvy investors risk-mitigating derivatives and options in a financial volatile market. Hong Kong's economy is far more innovative than Shanghai in terms of variety of market instruments available for foreign investors, but Shanghai can copy most of what HK already offers.

Can China/Shanghai innovate in financial instruments give lack of free-flow of information/restricted censorship of China? It needs to if it wants to become a leader in the financial world and maintain an edge against Stanford, Harvard, MIT grads from US.



This post has been edited by Made in China: Dec 16 2009, 02:55 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Made in China
post Dec 16 2009, 02:58 PM
Post #4


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,661
Joined: 25-April 04




I think you should read this article before continuing:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLNE5B702920091208

FOR THOSE WHO ARE CONFUSED:

Shanghai/China can achieve remarkable growth (100 years of development in 10 years) by mimicking the successes of the Western economic model.

China's policy is to mimick and copy what works and then innovate later. ("Complex loans derivatives" invented by US financial gurus is what caused the Global crisis we are in....)

PREDICTION: China equals the West in financial arena after decades of rapid growth. Given the censorship and restricted free flow of information, Can the Chinese be as innovative with financial market instruments as the West?

This post has been edited by Made in China: Dec 16 2009, 02:59 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sinowarrior
post Dec 16 2009, 04:48 PM
Post #5


AF Addict
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 505
Joined: 8-August 09




^ LOL, stop bragging about HK.
financial centers are only full fledge when it's backed by a country 's great industrial base. otherwise it's a hollow shell.
for example, taiwan is greater than HK and Singapore combined in my POV because it has bigger industry bases.

EVen without innovating and surpassing the west, as long as CHina catch up and on par with level of the west, then it would have advantage over the west due to its cost and size of population.

China just need to on par with the west technologically, then the rest will take care by itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Made in China
post Dec 16 2009, 06:11 PM
Post #6


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,661
Joined: 25-April 04




I guess my question will not be answered than.

Hong Kong's hinterland is the Pearl River Delta (known as the 'Factory of the World') ... which alone generates 1/3 of China's exports. The PRD and YRD are China's two most dynamic and influential industrial powerhouse base.

HK's ranked #3 and Singapore #4 behind New York and London in terms of international financial centres. Taipei isn't even on the map.

This post has been edited by Made in China: Dec 16 2009, 06:23 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sinowarrior
post Dec 16 2009, 06:32 PM
Post #7


AF Addict
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 505
Joined: 8-August 09




RANK CHING
Hong Kong must make itself relevant to China

2009/12/17


WHEN Hong Kong was returned to China on July 1, 1997 after a century-and-a-half as a British colony, there was much anxiety as to whether the city would continue to prosper and to enjoy British-style rights and freedoms under China's formula of "one country, two systems" for 50 years.

Now, 121/2 later -- or a quarter of the 50 years allotted to Hong Kong as a Special Administrative Region of China -- much has changed.

To be sure, the rights and freedoms remain and demonstrations against the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989 continue to be held every June 4. This year, 150,000 people attended a candlelit vigil in Victoria Park where speakers called for Chinese officials to be held accountable -- the only part of China where such events take place.

And Hong Kong is as eager as ever to achieve full democracy, which Britain never allowed. China has now promised that Hong Kong's chief executive can be elected by universal suffrage in 2017 and the entire legislative council in 2020, but many are sceptical as to how fair the elections will be. Currently, half the legislature is chosen by universal suffrage, with the other members elected through a more limited franchise.

But it is on the economic side that things have changed most dramatically. Before 1997, Hong Kong people in general looked down on mainlanders as country bumpkins, but today mainland tourists are welcomed and the Chinese currency, or renminbi, is widely accepted.

Indeed, while in 1997 many in Hong Kong wanted to keep the mainland at arm's length, today many of the same people are working hard to integrate Hong Kong into the mainland economy, fearful that the city of seven million people might be marginalised as other Chinese cities boom.

When China announced earlier this year that Shanghai was to become an international financial centre by 2020, the fear in Hong Kong was palpable. While the local government made reassuring sounds about China being a big country that could accommodate two financial centres, many in Hong Kong were not convinced. The writing, they felt, was on the wall, and Hong Kong's days as an international financial centre were numbered.

Actually, anxious Hong Kong some years ago sought Beijing's reassurance about the city's future. Traditionally, the capitalist city was not included in China's five-year plans, but the current plan, for 2006-2010, does contain one short paragraph saying that the central government supports Hong Kong's status as an international financial, trade and logistics centre.

It is not widely known but that paragraph was written in Hong Kong and included in the five-year plan as a favour to the former British colony.

Now Hong Kong is asking for a seat at the table when the next five-year plan is drawn up, for the period 2011-2015. It wants to be heard on all decisions that may affect the city.

China has not done anything overtly to downgrade Hong Kong. In fact, Beijing clearly wants to help Hong Kong succeed.

Thus, when tourists from other countries stopped coming during the Asian financial crisis, Beijing allowed large numbers of mainland tourists to go to Hong Kong to bolster the economy. Now, mainland tourists exceed those from all other countries combined.

But as China develops, inevitably, its need for Hong Kong diminishes. Goods that used to be sent to Hong Kong for re-export to other parts of the world now can be sent abroad directly.

Hong Kong's container throughput used to be first in the world. Now it is behind Singapore and Shanghai, and two other Chinese cities, Shenzhen and Guangzhou, are expected to overtake Hong Kong soon.

The thaw in cross-strait relations also means that travel and trade between Taiwan and the mainland, which used to pass through Hong Kong, no longer does.


And, as China develops and improves relations with other parts of the world, Hong Kong's role as a gateway to China is no longer needed. Every Chinese city now is its own gateway.

Hong Kong still has certain advantages, such as a large body of professionals, like lawyers and accountants.

Other features include the rule of law, an independent judiciary and a largely corruption-free environment. These are important but still, foreign companies are flocking to the mainland despite its lack of such features.

And so Hong Kong has learned that if it is to keep growing, it must make itself relevant to China's growth. That accounts for the eagerness to be part of the next five-year plan.

This post has been edited by sinowarrior: Dec 16 2009, 06:34 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mndeg
post Dec 16 2009, 06:33 PM
Post #8


AF Legend
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 29,765
Joined: 18-September 04




the sheer number of phd's in China?

duh. plus the strong educational mindset that America does NOT have.

This post has been edited by mndeg: Dec 16 2009, 06:34 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Made in China
post Dec 16 2009, 06:48 PM
Post #9


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,661
Joined: 25-April 04




Sinowarrior: It's from a Singaporean website. (arch rivals of HK) There are better articles out there. Right now, HK is the #1 IPO centre in the world, beating NYC and Shanghai.

For the foreseeable future, HK will still be the main international gateway for foreign funds for mainland Chinese companies seeking global recognition and funds for expansion.

A lot better to be HK than Taiwan, which is probably entirely sidelined by China's economic miracle.

mndeg: That's not the point. You can have all the smart, diligent, hardworking ppl you want. American research is top notch because of free flow of information and academic freedom.

For example, take a Chinese mind and put him at Stanford, Harvard, or MIT. Take the same mind and put them in Peking University, Tsinghua, Fudan. By virtue of living in a free society like the US (as oppose to Communist China), that Chinese mind has a freedom to access unrivalled information free of gov't censorship. Innovation in a free society is a remarkable edge.

-------------

Size of population and industrial might will propel China into global ranks as a global power. In order for China to become an Economic Superpower, it must lead the world in free flow of information and innovation in the financial area.

China must relax it's grips on free flow of information and allow it's top notch talent to have the same liberal freedoms to innovate in order to have a competitive edge. Please don't give me this stone age thinking that "size/population and industrial might" will make financial superpowers. I am talking about MAJOR CAPITALIST SERVICE ECONOMY. China is not a major capitalist service economy. You need brains & talent to do that. Shanghai right now is lacking expertise in that area which is why it's going on a recruiting spree in Chicago, LA, NYC, and Singapore for financial talent.

This post has been edited by Made in China: Dec 16 2009, 06:51 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Made in China
post Dec 16 2009, 06:54 PM
Post #10


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,661
Joined: 25-April 04




Shanghai is to go overseas to seek senior financial talent for the second time.

Shanghai Financial Services Office will lead representatives of banks, insurers and brokers in trips to Canada, the United States and Singapore to hire senior financial professionals and experienced bankers in a campaign that starts this week.

In December 2008, a similar hiring campaign was held on Wall Street and in the City of London when many experienced staff were being let go by their crisis-hit employers.

Organizers received 10 applicants for every job on offer. Chinese working overseas showed most interest in the campaign last year.

The city, which is aiming to be the world's leading financial center, has already set up initiatives to attract and retain financial professionals by addressing quality-of-life concerns such as health care and education.

Shanghai is not lacking head count in the financial industry but is short of experienced talent. The industry accounts for more than 10 percent of the local economy, providing 200,000 jobs.

700,000 financial professionals work in New York, about 400,000 in London and 350,000 in Hong Kong. There were 230,000 financial professionals working in Shanghai by the end of last year, he added. (1.3 billion ppl population?)

China's problem is not about brain drain, because it has tons of bright students. It needs experienced talent in financial services (fledgling and nascent industry comprising ONLY 10% of Shanghai's economy...)

http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90778/90862/6831395.html

This post has been edited by Made in China: Dec 16 2009, 06:55 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hozobo
post Dec 16 2009, 07:07 PM
Post #11


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,400
Joined: 1-February 06




QUOTE (Made in China @ Dec 15 2009, 08:42 PM) *
Short summary:

China's sporatic growth is dependent on copying the Western model of capitalism with Chinese characteristics.

100 years of development in nearly 10 years since China didn't need to pioneer via trial-&-error.

Deng Xiaoping's market reforms (Guangdong model) based on Special Economic Zones like southern boomtowns like Shenzhen where in fact small-scale copies of the Hong Kong's free market economic models derived from the British.

Question 1: Will China be competitive after adopting a Western style game like capitalism?

Question 2: Will the West be force to migrate and adapt to capitalism with Chinese characteristics if they want to do business in China.

China's official policy right now is to mimic the success of the West as quickly as possible and then innovate. (100 years of development in nearly 10 years)

Question 3: How can China out-innovate the West at it's own game after China is on par with Western rivals? (after it is done implementing successful reform?)

I'm only saying this because I don't think China is as innovative as .... say the US... lol.

maybe because Made in China is not Made in China embarassedlaugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Made in China
post Dec 16 2009, 07:26 PM
Post #12


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,661
Joined: 25-April 04




this conversation is going no where. so i am going to stop arguing. sigh.

HK/Singapore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Taiwan.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
886
post Dec 16 2009, 07:42 PM
Post #13


AF Addict
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 777
Joined: 14-December 09




China today is no different with china before 1949....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
p0734334
post Dec 16 2009, 08:42 PM
Post #14


AF Geek
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 234
Joined: 15-October 09
From: Singapore Polytechnic




Oh yea, Singapore ftw ! icon_smile.gif embarassedlaugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sinraptor
post Dec 16 2009, 09:37 PM
Post #15


AF Guru
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 3,234
Joined: 13-August 08
From: Fusang




Of course China is not as innovative as the Americans right now, but that is not the point as the technology gap is closing in. For example last decade China was 40 years behing the US, this decade they are 20 years behind the US, next decade they will be 10 years behind and finally catch the US in 2020
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sampanviking
post Dec 17 2009, 03:44 AM
Post #16


AF Geek
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 124
Joined: 13-March 09
From: Bristol UK




Just the other day, BBC Radio was discussing the concerns that the City of London was in danger of slipping from the position of the worlds second most important financial centre. The City that is putting it under pressure? Shanghai!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Made in China
post Dec 17 2009, 11:42 AM
Post #17


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,661
Joined: 25-April 04




It was based on a survey of only 2 established economic centres (NY, London) and 3 emerging centres (Shanghai, Mumbai, UAE) ~ 600 senior business leaders on "CONFIDENCE LEVELS" lol

Shanghai and Mumbai had the highest confidence levels, therefore they will overtake London as the second most important financial centre. LOL What a retarded assessment.

Europe's Largest bank, HSBC's Chief Executive moved back to Hong Kong because the gravity of finance is migrating to the East. Jim Rogers and some ultra famous investor dude from Citi started China funds based in HK.

Shanghai is China's domestic/national financial hub, but it is HARDLY an International Financial Centre. It's stock market doesn't even have basic functions like short selling, has very strict capital controls on the flow of money, forbidden for foreign investors, etc....

---------------------------------------------------------------

Sinowarrior: My question is when China is on par with the US after years of development, will China have the innovative edge compared to a free society?

This post has been edited by Made in China: Dec 17 2009, 11:44 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sampanviking
post Dec 17 2009, 12:36 PM
Post #18


AF Geek
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 124
Joined: 13-March 09
From: Bristol UK




QUOTE (Made in China @ Dec 17 2009, 04:42 PM) *
It was based on a survey of only 2 established economic centres (NY, London) and 3 emerging centres (Shanghai, Mumbai, UAE) ~ 600 senior business leaders on "CONFIDENCE LEVELS" lol

Shanghai and Mumbai had the highest confidence levels, therefore they will overtake London as the second most important financial centre. LOL What a retarded assessment.

Europe's Largest bank, HSBC's Chief Executive moved back to Hong Kong because the gravity of finance is migrating to the East. Jim Rogers and some ultra famous investor dude from Citi started China funds based in HK.

Shanghai is China's domestic/national financial hub, but it is HARDLY an International Financial Centre. It's stock market doesn't even have basic functions like short selling, has very strict capital controls on the flow of money, forbidden for foreign investors, etc....

---------------------------------------------------------------

Sinowarrior: My question is when China is on par with the US after years of development, will China have the innovative edge compared to a free society?


So the opinions and feelings of confidence among Professionals in the City does not warrant much attention in your opinion? You do not feel that the people that set up and run businesses in the City thinking that they are not in the best physical location, or operating under the optimum regulatory framework to carry out that business is not a matter of considerable concern to the Authorities there?


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sinraptor
post Dec 17 2009, 02:53 PM
Post #19


AF Guru
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 3,234
Joined: 13-August 08
From: Fusang




QUOTE (Made in China @ Dec 17 2009, 09:42 AM) *
]---------------------------------------------------------------

] My question is when China is on par with the US after years of development, will China have the innovative edge compared to a free society?

I don't think freedom of speech is abolutely necessary for innovation as Nazi Germany had an innovative economy and the Soviet Union was quite innovative until it ran out of funds
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
African
post Dec 17 2009, 03:10 PM
Post #20


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,020
Joined: 15-December 08
From: Africa




QUOTE (sinraptor @ Dec 17 2009, 02:53 PM) *
I don't think freedom of speech is abolutely necessary for innovation as Nazi Germany had an innovative economy and the Soviet Union was quite innovative until it ran out of funds

This is true
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st November 2014 - 03:43 AM