China nr. 1 !

E. Migrant · 10 september 2014, 09:38

De Chinese economie is nu groter dan die van de US en daarmee de grootste van de planeet, 5 jaar eerder dan verwacht.

Why China hates being No. 1

by Minxin Pei @FortuneMagazine MAY 5, 2014, 9:00 AM EDT

Beijing reacted with thinly disguised animosity to reports that China would overtake the U.S. in 2014 as the world’s largest economy. Why? They don’t want the responsibility.

FORTUNE — Few countries would turn down the title of world’s largest economy. You can count China among them.

Only the United States has enjoyed the immense power and prestige conferred by this position in the last 140 years (the U.S. surpassed Great Britain as the world’s largest economy in 1872 and has held the spot ever since). But last week, the Chinese government reacted with thinly disguised animosity to an authoritative economic report announcing that China would overtake the United States in 2014 as the world’s largest economy in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP).

According to the International Comparison Program of the World Bank, in 2011, the Chinese economy totaled $13.5 trillion in purchasing power parity. It is on target to grow 24% between 2011 and 2014, compared to 7.6% cumulative growth for the U.S. For its part, the U.S. had $15.5 trillion in PPP in 2011. The Chinese economy at the end of this year is expected to have $16.7 trillion in PPP, slightly bigger than the $16.6 trillion projected for the U.S.

Before the release of the latest World Bank report, the consensus estimate among economists was that China would surpass the U.S. as the world’s largest economy in PPP terms in 2019. That China has managed to catch up with the U.S. five years sooner is largely due to the effects of the financial crisis and the Great Recession, which caused anemic growth in the U.S. but affected the Chinese economy only moderately.

Instead of bragging about its coronation as the world’s No. 1 economy, China first tried to delete the reference to the new PPP estimate of its economy in the World Bank report and then all but suppressed its coverage within China’s domestic media.

On the surface, Beijing’s unfriendly reaction makes no sense. Ever since the Tiananmen crackdown in 1989, the Chinese Communist Party has relied on economic growth as the most important source of its legitimacy. Being crowned the world’s largest economy should only help reinforce the party’s claims of credit for bringing prosperity and international respect to China. And Chinese foreign policymakers have been skillfully playing the expectations game around the world. By pointing to the inevitable rise of China as the world’s largest economy and the relative decline of the U.S., Beijing has had considerable success in changing the economic and geopolitical calculations in many capitals, notably in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East.

So, why does Beijing dislike being called No. 1 now?

Two contradictory emotions are at play here. Yes, the Chinese government craves the bragging rights and the political legitimacy conferred by dethroning the U.S. as the largest economy in the world. But at the same time, Chinese officials are pragmatic souls. They understand that cumbersome international obligations would come with the title. For example, China will now be likely called upon to contribute more to development aid and pay more dues at the United Nations (at the moment, China pays only 5% of the U.N. budget, making it the sixth-largest contributor). Most concerning, China’s newfound superpower status could undermine its negotiating position in climate talks — Beijing will find less justification in insisting that, as a developing country, it should not bear substantial financial burden in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

On the geopolitical front, the risks of being at the top of the economic heap are considerable. The U.S. and its allies, driven by fears of Chinese power, might balance against China. Because the Chinese economy is less than half that of the West (including Japan), China is no match against a potential anti-China bloc.

Domestically, the Chinese government also sees no upside in letting its people know the World Bank’s latest pronouncement (no major official Chinese news outlets carried the story). Beijing understands all too well that the World Bank’s report is at most an accounting exercise. It does not change anything on the ground — ordinary Chinese people are unlikely to feel suddenly wealthy, or grateful to the party, because their per capita income rose more than 40% overnight if switched to the PPP measurement. The likely reaction among the Chinese public to such a revelation would be to demand that Beijing spend more on social services and the environment.

For the business community, the implications of China’s accelerated ascendance to the top may be a bit academic as well. For those doing business with China, two things matter more than others. One is per capita income, which determines the effective consumption power of individuals. On this score, Chinese per capita income, even based on PPP, is only one-fifth that of the U.S. What this means is that the aggregate Chinese market may be large, but the real consumption power, which is determined by disposable income, is going to be relatively low for decades to come. The other factor is overall competitiveness, a function of political institutions, technological sophistication, innovation, and financial sector development. Here, again, China may have made huge strides in the last three decades, but it still remains way behind the U.S.

So, don’t expect Beijing to break out the party favors anytime soon.

Minxin Pei is the Tom and Margot Pritzker ’72 Professor of Government at Claremont McKenna College and a non-resident senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States

http://fortune.com/2014/05/05/why-ch...es-being-no-1/

Micele · 10 september 2014, 18:45

TS

Citaat:

According to the International Comparison Program of the World Bank, in 2011, the Chinese economy totaled $13.5 trillion in purchasing power parity. It is on target to grow 24% between 2011 and 2014, compared to 7.6% cumulative growth for the U.S. For its part, the U.S. had $15.5 trillion in PPP in 2011. The Chinese economy at the end of this year is expected to have $16.7 trillion in PPP, slightly bigger than the $16.6 trillion projected for the U.S.

China binnenkort n° 1 qua PPP of koopkrachtpariteit...

Citaat:

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koopkrachtpariteit

Koopkrachtpariteit (KKP) wordt ook wel aangeduid met de Engelse term "purchasing power parity" (PPP). Het is een manier om de koopkracht van twee landen te vergelijken.

De wisselkoers op de financiële markten wordt in belangrijke mate bepaald door de prijzen van de op de wereldmarkt verhandelde goederen en diensten, maar dit is vaak een heel ander pakket van goederen en diensten dan dat wat de mensen in het dagelijkse leven consumeren.

Het inkomen per hoofd in dollars kan daarom een sterk vertekend beeld geven van de werkelijke koopkrachtverhoudingen. De rijkdom van relatief rijke landen wordt hierdoor over het algemeen sterk uitvergroot, evenals de armoede van relatief arme landen. De mensen in de arme landen consumeren namelijk veel goederen en diensten die ter plaatse, met de lage arbeidskosten van die landen, geproduceerd worden, zodat de kosten van levensonderhoud hier (over het algemeen: er zijn natuurlijk altijd uitzonderingen) veel lager zijn dan in rijke landen.

Zo bedroeg, bijvoorbeeld, in China het inkomen per hoofd tegen de officiële wisselkoersen 1400 dollar, terwijl dit in koopkrachtpariteit 6200 dollar zou zijn (vergeleken met het Amerikaanse prijspeil). Omgekeerd bedraagt het inkomen per hoofd in Japan tegen de officiële wisselkoers 37.600 dollar, terwijl dat in koopkrachtpariteit slechts 31.400 dollar zou zijn (vergeleken met het Amerikaanse prijspeil).

Vroeger werd in de economische literatuur bijna uitsluitend cijfers van het inkomen tegen de officiële wisselkoers gebruikt, hetgeen vaak een verwrongen beeld gaf. Tegenwoordig gebruikt men steeds vaker cijfers op basis van koopkrachtpariteit.

Dat is niet altijd een verbetering. Wanneer het gaat om vergelijking van de invloed op de wereldmarkt, zijn de cijfers tegen officiële wisselkoers namelijk relevanter. Bovendien kan er verwarring optreden als niet heel duidelijk wordt aangegeven op welke grondslag de voor een vergelijking gebruikte cijfers berusten.

Een versimpelde versie van de koopkrachtpariteit is de Big Mac index van The Economist.

Citaat:

http://www.demorgen.be/dm/nl/996/Eco...grootste.dhtml

"China is niet graag de grootste"

Redactie − 02/05/14, 11u47 − Bron: Belga

De Chinese overheid heeft de afgelopen maanden geprobeerd te voorkomen dat de Chinese economie te boek komt te staan als de grootste ter wereld. Dat stelde de Britse krant Financial Times vrijdag op basis van ingewijden.

Eerder deze week bleek uit nieuwe berekeningen van de Wereldbank dat China hard op weg is om de Verenigde Staten in te halen als de grootste economie ter wereld, als wordt gecorrigeerd voor verschillen in koopkracht. De inhaalslag zou zelfs dit jaar al voltooid kunnen worden.

In het rapport werd al opgetekend dat China twijfels heeft over de gebruikte onderzoeksmethodes. Volgens bronnen rond het rapport ging het verzet van China echter aanzienlijk verder. "Er was een enorm debat", aldus één van de bronnen. "China wil niet gezien worden als nummer één, ze vrezen de politieke gevolgen daarvan. Ze hebben een jaar lang gesmeekt en gedreigd, ze vinden het vreselijk."

Een Chinese beleidsadviseur wees erop dat het cijfer over de totale Chinese economie verhult dat China nog altijd een relatief arm land is. Per hoofd van de bevolking reikt de Chinese economie internationaal niet verder dan de 99e plek, terwijl de Amerikaanse economie op die basis de op elf na grootste is.

Daarom zou China vooralsnog geen al te grote verantwoordelijkheden op zich willen nemen op het wereldtoneel, terwijl de druk om meer te doen alleen maar toeneemt als de Chinese economie daadwerkelijk wordt aangemerkt als de grootste ter wereld.

Ook qua GDP staat China nog ver achter de USA: (grafisch tem 2019)
http://money.cnn.com/news/economy/world_economies_gdp/

E. Migrant · 10 september 2014, 20:56

Ook India zal over afzienbare tijd de US in economische omvang voorbijgestoken zijn.

Amerika is op dat moment letterlijk en figuurlijk een derderangs macht op wereldvlak. Net voor landen als Rusland, Duitsland, Brazilië etc.

De dollar is tegen dan ook al lang tot een derderangs-rolletje teruggevallen.

Nietzsche · 10 september 2014, 20:58

10 september 2014, 09:38	#1
E. Migrant Banneling Geregistreerd: 4 oktober 2011 Berichten: 1.745	China nr. 1 ! De Chinese economie is nu groter dan die van de US en daarmee de grootste van de planeet, 5 jaar eerder dan verwacht. Why China hates being No. 1 by Minxin Pei @FortuneMagazine MAY 5, 2014, 9:00 AM EDT Beijing reacted with thinly disguised animosity to reports that China would overtake the U.S. in 2014 as the world’s largest economy. Why? They don’t want the responsibility. FORTUNE — Few countries would turn down the title of world’s largest economy. You can count China among them. Only the United States has enjoyed the immense power and prestige conferred by this position in the last 140 years (the U.S. surpassed Great Britain as the world’s largest economy in 1872 and has held the spot ever since). But last week, the Chinese government reacted with thinly disguised animosity to an authoritative economic report announcing that China would overtake the United States in 2014 as the world’s largest economy in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP). According to the International Comparison Program of the World Bank, in 2011, the Chinese economy totaled $13.5 trillion in purchasing power parity. It is on target to grow 24% between 2011 and 2014, compared to 7.6% cumulative growth for the U.S. For its part, the U.S. had $15.5 trillion in PPP in 2011. The Chinese economy at the end of this year is expected to have $16.7 trillion in PPP, slightly bigger than the $16.6 trillion projected for the U.S. Before the release of the latest World Bank report, the consensus estimate among economists was that China would surpass the U.S. as the world’s largest economy in PPP terms in 2019. That China has managed to catch up with the U.S. five years sooner is largely due to the effects of the financial crisis and the Great Recession, which caused anemic growth in the U.S. but affected the Chinese economy only moderately. Instead of bragging about its coronation as the world’s No. 1 economy, China first tried to delete the reference to the new PPP estimate of its economy in the World Bank report and then all but suppressed its coverage within China’s domestic media. On the surface, Beijing’s unfriendly reaction makes no sense. Ever since the Tiananmen crackdown in 1989, the Chinese Communist Party has relied on economic growth as the most important source of its legitimacy. Being crowned the world’s largest economy should only help reinforce the party’s claims of credit for bringing prosperity and international respect to China. And Chinese foreign policymakers have been skillfully playing the expectations game around the world. By pointing to the inevitable rise of China as the world’s largest economy and the relative decline of the U.S., Beijing has had considerable success in changing the economic and geopolitical calculations in many capitals, notably in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East. So, why does Beijing dislike being called No. 1 now? Two contradictory emotions are at play here. Yes, the Chinese government craves the bragging rights and the political legitimacy conferred by dethroning the U.S. as the largest economy in the world. But at the same time, Chinese officials are pragmatic souls. They understand that cumbersome international obligations would come with the title. For example, China will now be likely called upon to contribute more to development aid and pay more dues at the United Nations (at the moment, China pays only 5% of the U.N. budget, making it the sixth-largest contributor). Most concerning, China’s newfound superpower status could undermine its negotiating position in climate talks — Beijing will find less justification in insisting that, as a developing country, it should not bear substantial financial burden in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. On the geopolitical front, the risks of being at the top of the economic heap are considerable. The U.S. and its allies, driven by fears of Chinese power, might balance against China. Because the Chinese economy is less than half that of the West (including Japan), China is no match against a potential anti-China bloc. Domestically, the Chinese government also sees no upside in letting its people know the World Bank’s latest pronouncement (no major official Chinese news outlets carried the story). Beijing understands all too well that the World Bank’s report is at most an accounting exercise. It does not change anything on the ground — ordinary Chinese people are unlikely to feel suddenly wealthy, or grateful to the party, because their per capita income rose more than 40% overnight if switched to the PPP measurement. The likely reaction among the Chinese public to such a revelation would be to demand that Beijing spend more on social services and the environment. For the business community, the implications of China’s accelerated ascendance to the top may be a bit academic as well. For those doing business with China, two things matter more than others. One is per capita income, which determines the effective consumption power of individuals. On this score, Chinese per capita income, even based on PPP, is only one-fifth that of the U.S. What this means is that the aggregate Chinese market may be large, but the real consumption power, which is determined by disposable income, is going to be relatively low for decades to come. The other factor is overall competitiveness, a function of political institutions, technological sophistication, innovation, and financial sector development. Here, again, China may have made huge strides in the last three decades, but it still remains way behind the U.S. So, don’t expect Beijing to break out the party favors anytime soon. Minxin Pei is the Tom and Margot Pritzker ’72 Professor of Government at Claremont McKenna College and a non-resident senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States http://fortune.com/2014/05/05/why-ch...es-being-no-1/

10 september 2014, 20:56	#3
E. Migrant Banneling Geregistreerd: 4 oktober 2011 Berichten: 1.745	Ook India zal over afzienbare tijd de US in economische omvang voorbijgestoken zijn. Amerika is op dat moment letterlijk en figuurlijk een derderangs macht op wereldvlak. Net voor landen als Rusland, Duitsland, Brazilië etc. De dollar is tegen dan ook al lang tot een derderangs-rolletje teruggevallen.

10 september 2014, 20:58	#4
Nietzsche Secretaris-Generaal VN Geregistreerd: 15 april 2012 Berichten: 41.795