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.

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.

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?

^ 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.

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.

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.

the sheer number of phd's in China?

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

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.

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

maybe because Made in China is not Made in China

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

HK/Singapore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Taiwan.

China today is no different with china before 1949....

Oh yea, Singapore ftw !

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

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!

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?

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

What increases innovation is an advance infacstructure and high standards of education. This is why I think China will finally become an innovative country after its infastruture develops and after its institutes get high tech labs

The CCP Gov't in China's 5 year plan issued a commandment that Shanghai would become an International Financial Centre & Global shipping hub by 2020.

London on the other hand is already an International Financial Centre, more specifically, a Global Financial Command hub along with NYC and Tokyo.

CCP also pledges to institute financial reform, internationalize the RMB currency "to reflect the growing stature of the Chinese economy", lift strict capital controls, in order to for Shanghai to rival NYC and London.

Give Shanghai around 2040-50 in order to rival NYC/London/Tokyo.

Tokyo's GDP for example is $1.4 trillion compared to Shanghai's GDP of $200 billion. Shanghai is also heavily influenced by policy decisions by Beijing, which typically is interest in distributed growth to the benefit of national interests....

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

Sinowarrior: What will happen if China liberalizes Youtube, Google, allows for flexible academic freedom of speech. Do you think it would encourage more transfer of liberal and innovative ideas in China?

China is good at adopting ideas with a Chinese twist... Will China be good at making it's own stuff once fresh ideas to import is fully depleted?

Besides western style democracy, this is the other thing that I do not want China to copy from the west. Financial instruments contributes nothing substantial to the economy. It's a zero-sum game and merely an outlet for gamblers to game the system. I hope China do not become too deeply entrenched in these fundamental flaws of financial system, when it's time for China to out-innovate the west.

Did you know that complex repackaged loan derivatives and subprime mortgages are financial instruments which caused the collapse of the world economy.

What kind of a bright Harvard graduate would invent such clever financial products to make money when "prime mortgage" audience population dried up? Sometimes innovation for profit can be a bad thing.

Plus, financial instruments presently are way too complex for the financially illiterate Chinese investors who put their savings into IPO's just for the sake of gambling the market when it goes up 80-100%.

Wealthy investment bankers of ultra rich institutions basically run the US finance industry and the world economy.

That was a thought I was already pondering.

Certainly free exchange of ideas fosters more innovation. But unlike the U.S., I think China has the initiative and the power to devote farther reaching material resources to innovation. It not so much that the resources of the U.S. are lacking, but that we are unwilling to shift as much of them to a limited sector of the economy. A concentrated effort by China could offset the restrictive environment. And if that doesn't succeed as well as hoped, we may even see China ease up in that area someday.

^ Never thought of it like that.

That could work

the problem is not that PRC is "communist"

it has a little of communism and capitalism at the same time (economic policies)

but, regarding "government policies", we see a little bit of fascism (not implying that fascism is bad but...)

this is the key point that makes it different to the U.S.

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

now, about this word "innovation", well there are two types:

scientific research
social sciences research

the second one will be obviously censored lol

wow... That was bad, even for a white dude drunk on the kool-aid of western superiority.... you're so misguided I don't know where to start.

First, academic freedom in the west isn't as Free as you think it is. Academic research in the US is often just as affected to political pressure as China. You think the west is a bastion of freedom. It isn't. Political attitudes and political correctness often dictate the direction of academic research. Witness Climategate.

second... Shanghai's not unpopular with foreign investors. It's just that foreign investors aren't really allowed on the Shanghai stock exchanges, save for a few specialized transactions. You make it sound like investors wouldn't want to invest in Shanghai if it had the chance, when in reality, many would die for the opportunity to be the intermediary in, say, the Yuan denominated sovereign bond market. All it would take is for Beijing to give the OK, which it could easily do.

Third... you mention that China adopts a western model of development. errr.... unless you've been living under a rock, you'd know that out of all the countries in the world, China's probably the one nation that does *NOT* follow the western model of development. You might want to listen to what economic professors have to say about the Chinese model. Say for example, Joe Stiglitz. He did lots of analysis on the Chinese model vs the western model of development. You know Joe Stiglitz? He's a Nobel Laureate in economics. I'd tend to believe him just a tad bit more than you.

4th. "A market leader must always invent new financial products/instruments in order to lure investors" wow. Did you really write this? Do you not have the faintest idea how all the recession in the west started? not gonna say too much here except I'll quote some people who just happen to have far more credibility than you do.

"Finance produces nothing of value, no widgets. All we do is shuffle money around and collect fees. The more complex and opaque the instrument, the more likely that it is ripping people off."
-Jeremy Gratham, 2009 Buttonwood Gathering

"Like teenagers with their parents away, financial institutions threw a wild party that eventually tore-up the neighborhood."
-David Einhorn, 2009 Value Investing Congress

The "party" referred to by David Einhorn, was about financial derivatives. Also called financial weapons of mass destruction by Warren Buffet. The "neighborhood", if you didn't know... was America and Europe. I'd also suggest you read Also read Jim O'Neill, Head Economist at Goldman Sachs. You know... the guy who invented the term "BRIC"?

I'll leave it to you to figure out who these other people are that I've mentioned. Again, if you're gonna comment on Finance and economics, I'd suggest you do some hardcore reading first. If you don't know the people who I'm quoting, please don't talk to me because you know nothing about Finance. Then you might come to the conclusion that, If anything, the latest recession proved the superiority of the Chinese model over the Western Model.

You don't know what you are talking about.

Why would it want to? CDS, and MBS serve no useful purpose. You have bonds and equities to raise capital.

I used to trade options. It's mostly used for speculation.

Haha, that's not how things work.

Being 40 years behind America means that to start closing the gap, China had to develop the most simple technologies which, because of their giant population, was relatively easy to do once the workforce was mobilized.

If China wants to be "on par" with the technological leader of the world, however, they must stop producing plastic toys and pens and progress through the product cycle, building televisions, and cars.

Going from toy trucks to X-ray machines isn't a process which is remotely equal in difficulty, thus will likely take more time barring a flawless transition in the mold of Japan. Your statement looks nice on paper, but in actuality, it is a superficial and completely unsubstantiated assessment of reality.

China has grown so rapidly because it had literally nothing before the economic reforms, but now the room to grow is shrinking, so I think it would be wise for some of you on this forum to quit assuming that China will just continue to grow lawlessly at a double digit clip indefinitely, and overtake America without a doubt.

America currently has a hegemony on technology, international trade, millitary, intelligence, international relations, infrastructure, etc., so the notion that closing the technological gap and then waiting around while everything else "catches up" is absurd as China needs to challenge America on many, many, many different fronts, which are not as interconnected as you'd like to believe.

Is this what the Chinese government-employed internet police look like?

Can you at least attempt to be partially objective?

Ace06 knows what he is talking about.

too bad all your technology advancement are all build by immigrant including a lot of chinese, but your kind claim all the credit, soon as your dollar revalue, well see if 'other inferior people' still want to work for you

80% of America's present growth is based on new inventions.

China can strive to labor intensive heavy industrial production methology.

Once that is saturated and plateau, China will need to focus on EDUCATION in order to create intellectual capital and innovations and new inventions to create global brands to stay competitive.

The Great Li Ka Shing, Chinese billionaire, said this.

sorry to burst your bubble but printing money and robbing others land and resources is not exactly 'new inventions'

It's actually China that desperately wants to loan US money in order to keep American consumerism afloat in order to drive China's one dimensional export oriented economy.

Without American consumerism, China's export oriented economy would be fu-ked.

So without printing money and robbing other ppl's lands, China will in effect be fu-ked.

sorry Mr whitey i don't think you have enough brain power or education to argue with me, if you call china was desperate then what do you call US was? you clearly are a desperate idiot to say what u just said because at least china still has MONEY to buy the US debt, but US has NO MONEY plus debt, not only US bankrupted herself (fu-ked herself in the @$$) she brought down (fu-ked)almost 1/4 of the world with her and as arrogant as you not only it never say thank you, it throws blame on other country/people

Why would China be willing to purchase more US treasury bonds in light of the falling dollar?

Depreciation of US dollar goes hand-in-hand with a falling US economy. China's vast reserves of US dollars would lose it's value.

10% drop of US Dollar would wipe out years of economic growth from the Chinese economy.

It is in the best interest that the American economy revives quickly and Chinese economy resumes export which drives employment and the rise of the middle class in China.

That's why Chinese leaders are hoping loaning the American gov't more money, they will spend more money, and GDP would increase leading to an American recovery which is benefitial to the Chinese economy.

It's interconnected. China relies more on the US than vice versa.

Without American consumerism, China's export oriented economy will be fu-ked.

lol your brain is fu-ked up, you can't even absorbed a little of what I just said, you keep saying that china is fu-ked but going the same logic, US is ceased to exist

"China relies more on the US than vice versa" clearly either you are drunk or your IQ is just too low, this is just a simple logic
china HAD money, US HAD NO MONEY and in DEBT, now which relied on which more? u still can't grasp this very simple $hit? I bet if I have to explain this to you its gonna be 6 pages more, good lord how on earth that all 40's yrs old whitemen that come here all have low IQ

lol he log out, try to re-read this and think about it for mmmm...2, 6, 60 days and go back and reply only after you understood the concept mkey n don't forget n don't be shy to ask ppl around haha

40 year old white men? I got to a top 15 university, idiot. I am not white, I am Chinese.

It doesn't make your argument right by calling me names.

Sustaining Chinese growth depends on a lively and vivid US economy. By loaning $ to US, US gov't can spend money to recover the economy from crisis, increase GDP, thereby helping Chinese export economy growth and sustain employment for the Chinese ppl.

That's the reason why China is willing to dwarf Japan as the largest holder of US treasury bonds. Plus, US has nearly $35 trillion dollars of federally owned goods, buildings, and equipment to sell off so China is more than willing to loan more since US federal gov't has the collateral to repay the debt in case China ever needs it.


It's not as stupid as: China has money, US doesn't have money, etc....


I remember when I was as stupid as you Chinese nationalistic monkey. Read up on some economics.

only idiot would believe you are chinese, you are as white as redneck from trailer park any one with brain can see through your posts, and you call me a nationalistic just because I get frustrated by your idiocy
heres a bit more simple to understand:
China is a lender, US is the borrower, ppl go to loan business or BE A LOAN SHARK simply because there are DESPERATE ppl who need to borrow money NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND! you simply said that these lender are desperately loaning their money to their borrower, they need borrower to keep on business but they are not the desperate one

China economy relies on the WORLD economy, China did not rely solely on US but the world economy relied on US economy, if world economy relied on Japan, China would loan money to Japan instead of US, but to say that the lender. the creditor is more desperate than the borrower is just an idiot brainless arrogant white man would ever see it that way, that is your signature, because you guys never wrong and everybody depend on you super hero to save the world, but in reality you guys never or intent to help anyone you even contributed to your own problem

like I said, it's going to be 6 pages more to explain this to you, so it's better if you re-read it 100000x before reply so your brain has a lot of times to process the info

Confucius says, Don't argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

yeah and clearly the idiot is YOU!
people who HAS the money and LEND the money are doing it for investment so they can CONTINUE GROWING, people who NEED the money and BORROW the money are the one that desperate because they need it just to STAY ALIVE!

US had NO MONEY and OWED others MONEY and bankrupted 1/2 of the world because they put their money in US, and the US screwed them up too, no matter how much value of the US is at that time if NO ONE HAS the money to buy then the US value is ZERO, plus they need to maintain their property and infrastructure which require more money
if China as evil as US, China should already owned 1/2 of US
but
Idiot whiteman says, whiteman is always right no matter what!

You are right. You win at an internet conversation

May that bring you the life you want.

thank you and successfully proved that you are n idiot on internet
that might not bring the life that I want but I enjoy it

Enjoy your Porntube and "but sex wit little bois" on the internet.

that's old whitemen like you hobby, you guys go to thailand or SEA to get little bois, everyone knows that

And those immigrants aren't going anywhere anytime soon. A good portion of Chinese probably may leave due to their mother country's success, but considering how minuscule of a minority they compromise in America, I'm going to go ahead and predict that the U.S. will somehow survive.

A major, major problem for China is that they have absolutely no draw for any kind of foreign talent; superpowers throughout the history of the world have been intellectual centers, drawing talent from all over the world.

When compared to America, however, China has no pull, as very few intellectuals/innovators are going to want to establish themselves in a country where every single expression is scrutinized by the state, and subjected to complete and total arbitrary punishment.

As one example, it was mostly German scientists who developed the atomic bomb for the United States, and then much of America's space program. The reason these Germans came to the U.S. is because they were guaranteed more freedom than anywhere else.

Even if China does come to possess the more stable economy, with a larger workforce and better prospects for the future when juxtaposed with America, the Chinese will have to produce everything domestically, as talent won't be visiting them from abroad, except for possibly Cubans and North Koreans



Understatement of the century; America built China. The U.S. may not now be able to destroy what they've already created, but the fact remains that America made China what it is today, and what it hopes to be tomorrow.

American companies used China to maximize their profits due to the ginormous swaths of cheap labor once the CCP decided to open their economy to foreign investment.

Although labor was available in the rest of the third-world, China was a safe bet for America, and companies from other European countries, as they had over a billion people at their disposal, and only one state to deal with.

The two are still tied to this day, but if all the right moves are made, China can wean itself off American dependence eventually.

And the WORLD economy relies on America.

Has this not been made clear to you by the, I don't know, recession?

It's sad that so many posters on this site react violently to anything that even remotely questions the idea that China will be the greatest power the world has ever seen within a few years.

America has led the world for sixty years, yet it's now a foregone conclusion that China will sail smoothly to economic dominance within the next few decades? Come on . . .

Didn't Shanghai go on a shopping spree to lure Chinese expats from Singapore, LA, Chicago, London, NYC back to Shanghai because Shanghai lacked financial talent?



China was probably most influenced by Hong Kong businessmen who built the Guangdong factories (AKA "Factory of the world") and constituted 75% of foreign investment during the 80's and 90's and Taiwanese businessmen whose 70K businesses in the mainland contributed nearly $110 billion in Foreign Direct Invesment since 1990's.

But yes, I totally agree. It's major companies like Walmart that headquarters themselves in Shenzhen/Hong Kong that gave a huge boast to the Chinese export economy.


Some ppl only hear what they see in the news. Even the hype of Japan overtaking the US economy to become the next superpower rival didn't come into fruition because of asset bubbles and housing hubbles which caused "Japan's lost decade" lol.

Same hype of Japan becoming the next Superpower during the 1980's is just like what we are experiencing with China now.

Except China is actually a cripple in the sense that if it were a full capitalist fully liberalized economy, it could do much more and reach it's maxx potential.