It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
EARLY LAST MONTH, the accounting firm of Ernst and Young released a report concluding that the "nonperforming" loans of China's banks totaled $911 billion (40 percent of China's GDP)--a figure that far exceeds the Chinese government's own estimate of $164 billion. Beijing's response to the report was not subtle: "The report not only seriously distorts the actual assets quality of the Chinese banking sector," but "its conclusions are absurd and incomprehensible." Ernst and Young withdrew the report the next day, citing fundamental errors in the analysis.
But was the report really that flawed? Or was the firm's report more right than wrong, and retracted only because doing business in China these days requires pulling one's punches?
...
In fact, the Ernst and Young report was not unique. Very few financial analysts believe China's "official" figure for NPLs. Most think the ratio of bad loans is considerably higher, maybe as high as 50 percent, according to Frank Song, director of Hong Kong University's China Financial Research Center. When suspected NPL figures are combined with prospective NPL estimates, the Ernst and Young report's figure of $900 billion is probably not wildly off the mark. In fact, previous estimates by Standard and Poor's and PricewaterhouseCoopers indicated that Chinese NPLs could very well top $800 billion; and Fitch Ratings has just put the number at close to $700 billion. Like any such assessment, it's possible that the Ernst and Young report was based on assumptions and analysis that could be called into question. But it's just as likely that the report's inconvenient timing was the reason it was retracted.
www.weeklystandard.com...
posted by Number23
EARLY LAST MONTH, the accounting firm of Ernst and Young released a report . . .
[Edited by Don W]
Beijing's response to the report was not subtle: "The report not only seriously distorts the actual assets quality of the Chinese banking sector," but "its conclusions are absurd and incomprehensible." Ernst and Young withdrew the report the next day, citing fundamental errors in the analysis.
But was the report really flawed? Or was the firm's report more right than wrong, and retracted only because doing business in China these days requires pulling one's punches? This is the skeleton in the closet of the Chinese economy Japan went through the same thing in the 80's and they still haven't fully recovered. China will continue to lead the world's economic growth in the foreseeable future, but the Chinese growth rate will gradually decline to the Korean level. By then, hopefully, China will be a freer country as South Korea became by the late 1980s.
[Edited by Don W]
Originally posted by donwhite
So why does the US give a hoot if the Chinese want to sell goods here “below cost?” Who does the US Treasury work for anyway? Would not the increase in the value of the Yuan cause more inflation in the US? Is that a good thing? Or, just who benefits from inflation? I'm sure someone does. Guess who?
posted by dr_strangecraft
posted by donwhite
So why does the US give a hoot if the Chinese want to sell goods here “below cost?” [Edited by Don W]
The real savings for China is in terms of labor costs. They pay in Yuan that won't buy much. Allowing their currency to float would raise the US price of Chinese mfg'd goods. If the Yuan were allowed to float, it would probably cause a spiraling revaluation . . the Yuan worth more and more, destroying a lot of the status quo for China exporting cheaply. [Edited by Don W]
Originally posted by donwhite
I don’t like any so-called “free” market where a few dozen well connected and ultra rich people can actually whipsaw billions of ordinary, hard working, trusting people around the world by pricing the very commodities they must have and on money they cannot live without.
I refuse to accept any system that says a few dozen strategically placed people can run - or ruin - my country’s economy and my future, too.
Originally posted by donwhite
Don't forget, the USSR lasted 70 years as a command economy. I date China's from 1977, so that means it could last until 2047?
posted by Astronomer70
posted by donwhite
Don't forget, the USSR lasted 70 years as a command economy. I date China's from 1977, so that means it could last until 2047?
Try dating it from 1949.
Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
The age of fiat currency really IS coming to an end. It will probably take decades. Even so, I intend to profit handsomely from the event.
Originally posted by chaosrain
Any chance you'd be willing to describe your strategy in doing so? I think it's safe to say that even though the ATS community is a large one, many will not have the motivation or opportunity to deflate the profit potential of your strategy by hopping on board.
Thanks in advance...
posted by chaosrain
posted by dr_strangecraft
The age of fiat currency really IS coming to an end. I intend to profit handsomely from the event. [Edited by Don W]
Any chance you'd be willing to describe your strategy in doing so? I think it's safe to say the ATS community will not have the motivation to deflate the profit potential of your strategy by hopping on board. Thanks in advance [Edited by Don W]