laowaigentleman:

I think the government would lose face in front of its people and resort to populist measures like (heightened) militarism and nationalism.

Think of all the empty shells out there with nothing else to live for but work and the acquisition of trinkets for face.

I remember footage from Korea during the 1999 Asian Crisis. People were leaping off bridges in a line.

At least we'll get to see some theatre. 

Scandinavian:

I thought the government was already loosing face ever day by not being able to provide safe food for the nation. But that is my crazy thinking and of course based on the fact that no one in China is allowed to know that the rest of the world (- a couple of places) have safe food. Just as perhaps no one would be allowed to know that it isn't the whole world going to shit it the local economy tanks.

laowaigentleman:

Yes. I am always hearing and reading about a weakened "world economy".

They're clearly bracing themselves for something, but they're known for their paranoia if nothing else.

I no idea how I could go about providing food for the nation if I were in charge though. The only option is to import it and that would compel people to acknowledge that other countries have clean food.

My co-workers know that Thai rice has half the lead content of Chinese rice, and I'm sure they were talking about rice grown in south China, not the north.

Scandinavian:

Look up how China and Taiwan are exchanging rice.... They are not. Taiwan has lots of good quality rice but someone with a tiny tackle in China just doesn't want to allow the food in because of the political situation. It's face versus safety. In my book not a choice. A good leader should admit any wrongdoings if it servers the greater good. Chinese leaders cannot do so for a number of reasons, none of the good reasons. 

BHGAL:

I mentioned to my wife one day a few months ago.... don't buy Chinese rice, get Thai rice.... she said she is already doing that. My wife is "pretty simple" but for her to know this impressed me.

I'm 58 and confident I can handle the recession. One that I am confident is coming. Many young Chinese will be hurt. Timing is the big unknown. How long can they hang on?. No doubt in my mind that this years "small" growth (+/- 7%) is an indicator of further, more realistic numbers to follow.

decline , no, slowing without a doubt...  buy a house this coming year, yah maybe, or next year.....hmmmmmm.

mattsm84:

I don't know that I agree. Government spending on goods is calculated when coming up with GDP figures-- and remember that a recession is about a lack of GDP growth overtime--but the world's military spending has essentially remained flat since 2008 while the world's economic growth rate remains steady at around 3%.

BHGAL:

nothing socialist about xi jinping ..... money money money... capitalist

http://english.cntv.cn/2014/11/06/ARTI1415275846992536.shtml

there was one the other day, an article, where he again said, hurry up... we need money!! ..  the only way China can survive is to go global, let business in and spend what they got out. poor China residents. 1.3 billion... not all millionaires.

dongbeiren:

If arms spending were reduced (which I think it should be) more capital would be freed up for social services and consumer spending so I really don't see how arms spending is keeping the world out of recession. It's true that some people profit greatly from the military industrial complex but the people and the economy as a whole suffer from it due to inefficient allocation of resources. 

As for your point about mass markets, it's true that the economy needs them but history has proven time and time again that free market capitalism is the best system to produce wealth and lift people out of poverty. Capitalism allows people to have purchasing power. We are living in the best example of that. Hard left policies almost destroyed this country and hundreds of millions of people in China can now afford decent consumer goods due to Deng Xiao Ping's free market policies. No leftist country has every created prosperity. Only after a country develops through capitalism can it afford to adopt socialist policies and the lower economic growth that they entail (Western Europe). 

ScotsAlan:

My answer above is about what I call "rampant capatalism". I agree that the free market is the best way to lift people from poverty. The communist central economy will never work. But capatalisim has to be regulated at the top end, not the bottom. Yes, I totally agree that the capatalists create wealth, but when a few people become so wealthy that they can influence Government to allow them more freedom to grow even bigger is wrong. A level playing field for small to medium companies in a global market can only be assured by Government legisilation to protect them from the behemovs.

Scandinavian:

you mean, Chinese GDP figures are reliable because they are based on made up data and illusions ? 

mattsm84:

unreliable.