And right now, China has the "one child" rule for families. What happens when the oldest generation hits retirement age, and there are only a few million to take care of the old billions? That ought to be interesting.

Thats a very interesting point. I know here in Australia our politicians often state the reason why we need higher immigration is because we aren't populating enough ourselves to have a younger generation to work and pay for the pensions of the elders.

I wonder if China a bit down the track will also have to open its borders to massive immigration like West in order to service this shortfall?
It will be interesting to see if they go down that road as they are one of the few MONOCULTURES that are left.

Hi Flighty,

Thanks for your post. Although China does have a one child policy, enforcement is mainly only maintained in the cities. There are plenty of farming communities and regions where parents still have multiple parents.

Even Chinese business partners I have worked with confirm this.

well....I guess that threat was rather in vain wasn't it?
I mean, china threatens to dump their dollars...and then the rest of the world says, go ahead, or wait a minute, here we'll do it for you....and creates a few hundred billion or so and dumps it to save a few hedge funds.....

think maybe china might be happy now, I mean.......they wanted a bunch of dollars dumped into the market....and well, they not only got dollars, but euros and yen also........oh, you mean.....they wanted to do the dumping so they could get top dollar for their dollars BEFORE the dollar's value was depreciated by the dumping?? oh...so sorry....guess they might not be so happy after all..

why do I get the feeling that there's a little bit of economic warfare going on???

The threat issued by China is nothing more than propaganda to the untutored masses in which they are specialized at and a ROTFLMAO joke to those who understand macro-economics.

1. China would have carefully scrutinized the various stocks and options before dumping its earned reserves in. As such, those selected stocks and options would be the best, profitable and fundimentally strong types.

Thus, if it pull its money out, after a short correction, other nations and fund managers would gladly take its place and make up the shortfall, for who doesnt want to make a profit out of fundimentally strong stocks or options?

The guy who issued the threat would be nuts to pull out and oughta be shot by its own masses who are hoping to see its national reserves grow more, but once pulled out, aint making a dime or placed in much more riskier stocks

2. Who stands to lose more if the US dollar falls? MOST definately China with its undervalued yuan!! When it happens, american exports to China would be cheaper for its masses and chinese exports to america would be more expensive to buy by americans, thus curbing american consumer spending.

So whats to fear of China??!!! Petulant economic baby China should start growing up and play by international rules. Nobody wants to humble China. The world only wants an equitable trading system, if not a fair one, amongst every nation so that the people will benefit on a win-win system instead of 'live and let others die' economic management style.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth102
The threat issued by China is nothing more than propaganda to the untutored masses in which they are specialized at and a ROTFLMAO joke to those who understand macro-economics.

I am going to presume that you understand macro economics?

1. China would have carefully scrutinized the various stocks and options before dumping its earned reserves in. As such, those selected stocks and options would be the best, profitable and fundimentally strong types.

FOR CHINA. Do you understand the difference?

Thus, if it pull its money out, after a short correction, other nations and fund managers would gladly take its place and make up the shortfall, for who doesnt want to make a profit out of fundimentally strong stocks or options?

There is nothing special about 'strong fundamentals' in a world where speculative forces can attack whatever they want; i am not sure why China's 1.3 trillion dollar reserve would be employed in the stupid way you are suggesting.

The guy who issued the threat would be nuts to pull out and oughta be shot by its own masses who are hoping to see its national reserves grow more, but once pulled out, aint making a dime or placed in much more riskier stocks

So for some reason we are just assuming that the country who is managing such growth by control of it's currency will shot itself in both legs? You don't see the contradiction there?

2. Who stands to lose more if the US dollar falls?

The United States of America?

MOST definately China with its undervalued yuan!!

There was a time when that still mattered but at this point the US lacks the industrial base to compete with China however 'realistic' the exchange rate. China holds the aces is evident by the fact that they can force the US into the trade situation it's currently facing.

When it happens, american exports to China would be cheaper for its masses

There are few consumer goods that China can not manufacture itself or import on the cheap from Japan or Taiwan. China does not 'need' the US but there is no reason to break of a relationship that is overwhelmingly in favour of Chinese growth.

and chinese exports to america would be more expensive to buy by americans, thus curbing american consumer spending.

China's consumer market is fast growing and it could easily create friendlier local export markets with the 1.3 trillion dollars it controls. To suggest that China is more dependent on the USA than the USA is on China is showing a vast ignorance of international affairs.

So whats to fear of China??!!! Petulant economic baby China should start growing up and play by international rules.

It long has and it's more successful than the majority of players and it tends to try break as many of the rules, that prevents further growth , as possible.

Nobody wants to humble China. The world only wants an equitable trading system,

No it does not and i would be more than surprised if you can find evidence that the IMF/World bank have done much related to 'equity'.

if not a fair one,

There is NOTHING fair about the globalised capitalism the powers that be wants to force on us.

amongst every nation so that the people will benefit on a win-win system instead of 'live and let others die' economic management style.

So then we should probably be getting rid of capitalism altogether.

Stellar

Originally posted by edsinger
It would not be in China's interest to watch the dollar fall. It would have been a poor investment. Look at the chart and you can understand just who owns the debt.

Then why is the dollar falling so fast and why is China's economy expanding faster and faster?

As for the 50 trillion - that is the great burden left by the socialists, entitlements promised for votes.

Wars,intervention, corporate bailouts and blatant theft is what left the US bankrupt and it's a fact like any that the American people did not benefit from that spending.

btw - these socialists are both democrats and republicans.

Corporate socialism is quite different from regular socialism and neither the democrats or the republicans are socialist in any good sense.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX
I am going to presume that you understand macro economics?

FOR CHINA. Do you understand the difference?
There is nothing special about 'strong fundamentals' in a world where speculative forces can attack whatever they want; i am not sure why China's 1.3 trillion dollar reserve would be employed in the stupid way you are suggesting.
So for some reason we are just assuming that the country who is managing such growth by control of it's currency will shot itself in both legs? You don't see the contradiction there?
The United States of America?
There was a time when that still mattered but at this point the US lacks the industrial base to compete with China however 'realistic' the exchange rate. China holds the aces is evident by the fact that they can force the US into the trade situation it's currently facing.
There are few consumer goods that China can not manufacture itself or import on the cheap from Japan or Taiwan. China does not 'need' the US but there is no reason to break of a relationship that is overwhelmingly in favour of Chinese growth.
China's consumer market is fast growing and it could easily create friendlier local export markets with the 1.3 trillion dollars it controls. To suggest that China is more dependent on the USA than the USA is on China is showing a vast ignorance of international affairs.
It long has and it's more successful than the majority of players and it tends to try break as many of the rules, that prevents further growth , as possible.
No it does not and i would be more than surprised if you can find evidence that the IMF/World bank have done much related to 'equity'.

There is NOTHING fair about the globalised capitalism the powers that be wants to force on us.

So then we should probably be getting rid of capitalism altogether.

Stellar

I am not about to be dragged into a senseless debate with you or any other red book waving commies , even though you are obviously rude. Let the market show and prove to you how wrong you are, then you will probably disappear into hiding, common amongst your kind and will pretend that you never say what you wrote here.

cheers

Listen to marg... she is usually, if not right, then on the right track which is more than can be said about a lot on here including myself.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth102
I am not about to be dragged into a senseless debate

I did not want to get dragged in either but what i can do when people so blatantly misrepresent reality.

with you or any other red book waving commies ,

Where did you get that from? I am just interested because i never seem to get explanations for why i am called that.

even though you are obviously rude. Let the market show and prove to you how wrong you are, then you will probably disappear into hiding,

Well i can work on being 'rude' but are you going to get your money back from whoever taught you economics?

common amongst your kind and will pretend that you never say what you wrote here.

cheers

I have been wrong before ( luckily i resolved a great many issues before ever joining this forum) and i can show you how i have admitted to, and apologised for, the few mistakes i have been shown to make. If you can show me a instance where you admitted to a mistake you get to point fingers but until then you would be best advised to stick to the issue.

Stellar

There is no way China could liquidate its $US1.33 trillion, they would lose a huge amount of money, they couldn't get rid of a fraction of it before the dollar crashed, destroying their investment. Not to mention their economy would be in a shambles without the hundreds of bilions US compnaies spend in China, a large part which goes to paying the wages of the CHinese poeple. The Chinese want to keep the people happy or else they're stuffed.