posted
Those that have followed the news reports in the Olympics and Tibet threads probably already know that I have a pretty dim view of the ability of foreign-based news crews (as opposed to local activists, the few non-corrupt local reports, and a few expat reporters) to get a good look at things within China and more importantly, change things for the better.
Here is one case where I think the they do deserve a certain amount of kudos for bringing up an issue where they can do something positive:
quote: Jumped by a gang of men overseeing the e-waste operations who tried to take the CBS team's cameras, Pelley’s crew managed to escape and bring back footage of the hazardous activities. Pelley's investigation will be broadcast this Sunday, Nov. 9, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
The Chinese attackers were trying to protect a lucrative business of mining the e-waste-junked computers, televisions and other old electronic products-for valuable components, including gold. "They're afraid of being found out. This is smuggling. This is illegal," says Jim Puckett, founder of the Basel Action Network, a group working to stop the dumping of toxic materials in poor countries that certifies ethical e-waste recyclers in the United States. "A lot of people are turning a blind eye here. And if somebody makes enough noise, they're afraid this is all going to dry up."
...
Potable water must now be trucked into Guiyu and scientists have discovered that the city has the highest levels of cancer-causing dioxins in the world. Pregnancies in Guiyu are six times more likely to result in miscarriages, and seven out of 10 children there have too much lead in their blood.
...
In fact, even some companies promising to recycle it safely will illegally export it, as 60 Minutes reveals. While visiting a Colorado recycling operation, 60 Minutes videotaped and noted the serial number of a container full of cathode ray tube (CRT) monitors, generally illegal to export because of high lead content. The container was then shipped to Hong Kong, where local law prohibits the import of toxic e-waste.
When Pelley confronted him with evidence of the export, the owner of the Colorado recycling company denied filling the shipping container found on his lot and says his company would not sell scrap CRT monitors or television screens overseas.
But 60 Minutes learned that the company, and 42 other American firms just like it, were recently caught in a government sting. They all offered to break the law by selling such e-waste when solicited by a federal agent posing as a foreign importer.
I hope they nail these kinds of American companies to the wall (along with the likely corrupt local officials who turn a blind eye to it).
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is the sort of situation that demands a large degree of oversight. This is not a system that will self-regulate, since it is cheaper to export this stuff to the Guiyus of the world, so people will do it unless we strictly penalize it based on a higher mandate.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
With any luck, Bush will insure that all these companies get an expensive bailout just before leaving office. Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mucus: I completely agree, it's absolutely unconscionable for people to conduct business in this way. I'm very glad they escaped with the footage.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not sure where to stash this since all the serious economics threads seem to have dropped off in favour of UF's "economics" threads.
quote: China has announced an ambitious $586-billion (U.S.) plan to bolster its faltering economy, focusing on domestic demand as the key to salvaging the extraordinary growth rates that have turbocharged the global economy for the past decade.
The plan would pump a huge flow of money into China's railways, roads, airports, housing, farming sector and social welfare system - all in a last-ditch effort to avert a "hard landing" in the Chinese economy, which is now widely predicted for next year.
The massive spending package, combined with a promise of lower taxes and looser credit, is a dramatic sign of Beijing's anxieties about the looming global recession and how it could destabilize Chinese society. It also signals China's awareness of its crucial importance to the global economy, and how it needs to co-operate on an international rescue plan.
The new spending, announced yesterday and planned for the next two years, would be the biggest stimulus package attempted by the Chinese government. It would be equal to more than one-sixth of the $3.3-trillion Chinese economy.
...
The announcement yesterday was clearly seen as a radical remedy. The plan would provide billions of additional dollars for 10 major areas, including low-income housing, rural infrastructure, water, electricity, transportation, the environment, technological innovation, and rebuilding from natural disasters such as the Sichuan earthquake.
Pretty awesome stuff. Kinda envy it here in Canada since our government is doing pretty much nothing for improving infrastructure (and has been doing nothing even during good times).
Some amusing reaction:
quote: Common-or-garden stimulus packages are what governments in places like Britain, South Korea and Japan do to stimulate their economies. China’s $586 billion splurge is something entirely different. If Washington directed an equivalent percentage of its GDP at a stimulus package, it would be worth more than $2.2 trillion, and would consequently be utterly terrifying.
And, on closer inspection, China’s could indeed be something scarier than just a big stimulus package. Neatly disguised as the Kool-Aid that everyone else is drinking at the moment, Beijing’s offering is actually a knockout cocktail of political manifesto, Great Game diplomacy and domestic Riot Act.
...
But also swirling around Sunday's announcement is the tacit question of what China can do for a broken financial system. Imagine the Great Gamesmanship of introducing a stimulus package so vast that it not only saves your own economy from decline, but establishes it as an engine of global recovery. Swaggering rights well worth $586 billion if the trick worked.
There is a tongue-in-cheek email doing the rounds at the moment showing the development of Chinese political and economic beliefs across the last 60 years. Perhaps Messrs Wen and Hu are taking it seriously.
1949 (Chinese revolution): Only socialism can save China.
1979 (Deng Xiaopeng’s reforms): Only capitalism can save China
1989 (Fall of the Berlin Wall): Only China can save Socialism
2009 (Global financial crisis): Only China can save Capitalism.
posted
I am still very surprised that China announced this package. I mean I did read a few days ago that China was secretly giving cash to workers in the hardest hit sectors. For them to come out and offer a package that is, (proportionately speaking) almost four times greater than the one the US just passed is astonishing.
Knowing what I know about Chinese people, I think this can likely translate into some VERY solid infrastructural improvements. I hope high speed rail will be seriously considered.
As an aside I think that only significant trade surpluses over the last few years could allow for a package this inflated.
posted
Trade surpluses are just bookkeeping surpluses. Productivity is what allowed for it. Productivity that there are signs of huge drops in for the near future.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
BB: From some financial article, the source long forgotten (though it could actually have been written by Warren Buffet), it was claimed that the Chinese cannot simply spend whatever trade surplus they have accumulated domestically for some technical reason (inflation?) and thus it just builds up in USD and other foreign currencies. It claimed that not only are they buying US treasury bonds and companies in the US (they are obviously) but that there were very good economic reasons for them to do so.
I'll try to link it here if I find it.
fugu13: Which drops are you referring to? (I'd guess the rapidly aging Chinese workforce and the fact that they're starting to run out low-end manufacturing to expand into)
Also, what would you suggest to be good ways of tacking this problem?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mucus: you're misunderstanding what a trade surplus is (I suspect like BB did above). A trade surplus is not something you build up, can spend, or anything like that. It is just a consequence of net directional movement, and is not some sum of money that ends up in the hands of anyone in particular.
Now, the Chinese trade surplus is in part due to some of their currency policies, and is thus reflected in national currency reserves, but that's almost coincidental. And if they don't want to totally upend their currency and economy, they aren't going to spend that too fast.
As for productivity drops, China's GDP increase at the latest announcement was quite a bit lower than it has been for the past few years. Additionally, there have been reports of large numbers of plant closings and worker firings in the last small slice of time.
Most of the factors causing productivity drops probably aren't necessarily long-term game changing, but it doesn't really matter. China's going to see a very big shock to the economy; they are very coupled with global financial markets. This move isn't an attempt to fix capitalism, this move is an attempt to keep the Chinese economy from collapsing.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The ideal is to increase local consumption. There are a number of things that might be done long term: let the currency float a little more (they've been making the economy very dependent on exports by their currency manipulations; nice while it lasted, rather painful now), liberalize corporate ownership a bit, the usual.
Short term, not much idea. I'm not familiar enough with how the current situation is impacting the Chinese economy, and it isn't like there's a fairly obvious solution even if one is. The approach they're trying is hardly the worst one ever. At least they don't seem to be heading in certain very stupid directions some countries head in such conditions: price controls and tariff increases.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sigh. Sometimes, I can't help wondering if this kind of thing would get much more coverage by foreign media if it was in Tibet rather than in Sichuan.
More details on government reaction herePosts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
