Evergrande Is Only the Beginning(brookfieldbrief.com)
brookfieldbrief.com
Evergrande Is Only the Beginning
https://www.brookfieldbrief.com/posts/evergrande-is-only-the-beginning
70 comments
Few types of quotations could better convince me that their author is not worth listening to on anything related to China. Hilarious.
> Few types of quotations could better convince me that their author is not worth listening to on anything related to China. Hilarious.
I love how you tell everyone this is hilarious, but you don't go into any depth why you find this quite so funny.
I love how you tell everyone this is hilarious, but you don't go into any depth why you find this quite so funny.
I suppose the way I'd put it is that the author might as well have solemnly said that the Chinese word for "crisis" is composed of the characters "danger" plus "opportunity", therefore China is inherently better suited to meet the Evergrande crisis than America was for their financial crisis.
The fact that this was expected to be taken seriously, and then seemingly was by being upvoted to the front of Hacker News is what's funny.
The fact that this was expected to be taken seriously, and then seemingly was by being upvoted to the front of Hacker News is what's funny.
You have to be remarkably misinformed about Western Philosophy to think that epistemic relativism is somehow unique to the Chinese and that any (exaggerated) trend towards it can be blamed on the Chinese.
I am not blaming any specific persons or groups. I actually think its a group dynamic beyond control.
Can confirm this.
Many Chinese believer of "Freedom of Speech" was shattered after seen previous POTUS account vanishes from Twitter. This echoes the memory of their own accounts purged from Weibo.
And crackdown of Covid-19 "false info" utilize the same method as the Chinese Internet companies do.
Many Chinese believer of "Freedom of Speech" was shattered after seen previous POTUS account vanishes from Twitter. This echoes the memory of their own accounts purged from Weibo.
And crackdown of Covid-19 "false info" utilize the same method as the Chinese Internet companies do.
Not infringing Freedom of Speech in the Bill of Rights is a restriction placed on the government, not private businesses. Private businesses have always had the ability to decide who can use their services, for the most part (I say for the most part because companies aren't allowed to deny service based on certain traits, like race or gender, but that's a good thing).
And your second point, again, is something private companies are doing, not the government.
There's a big difference between individual companies deciding how to police their services versus what a government forces a company to do.
And your second point, again, is something private companies are doing, not the government.
There's a big difference between individual companies deciding how to police their services versus what a government forces a company to do.
How do you balance that with the cases where Governments (extra-US/federal/state/local) have been implicated in correspondence with private businesses to obtain takedowns of politically unpopular positions?
This gives the appearance of a Freedom of Speech issue, but it is actually more complex than that.
This gives the appearance of a Freedom of Speech issue, but it is actually more complex than that.
Just because the law is in place doesn't mean governments aren't going to do some shady shit anyway. I'm not trying to say that the US government is free from corruption or stretching/overstepping those boundaries. Hell, just look at what Snowden leaked a decade ago about the NSA mass surveillance of its own citizens.
But generally speaking, we do have some checks in place that at least so far have kept us from going as far as China has.
But generally speaking, we do have some checks in place that at least so far have kept us from going as far as China has.
“We’re flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation.”
Jen Psaki, Whitehouse Press Secretary
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/202...
Jen Psaki, Whitehouse Press Secretary
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/202...
Government and corporate cooperation in anti-disinformation campaigns is certainly an interesting, unsettled area of law. It's likely going to come down to the degree to which the government's efforts are coercive or not upon Facebook et al, and I wouldn't be able to tell you a priori if the current efforts do or do not violate the First Amendment.
It would certainly be welcome to see some people actually advancing these arguments in legal suits, but the extant cases are turning on allegations which don't advance these claims very well.
It would certainly be welcome to see some people actually advancing these arguments in legal suits, but the extant cases are turning on allegations which don't advance these claims very well.
This is something you can do too. Next to each post, by the 3-dot menu, select "Find support or report post." Click "False information", hit Next, and then hit Done. Voila! You have as much power as the U.S. government.
Who do I call when it’s not taken down?
No doubt Jen Psaki has Andy Stone, former Democratic PAC Communication Director, now Facebook Director on speed dial?
Hell I doubt Jen clicks anything when a quick call will do.
No doubt Jen Psaki has Andy Stone, former Democratic PAC Communication Director, now Facebook Director on speed dial?
Hell I doubt Jen clicks anything when a quick call will do.
> Many Chinese believer of "Freedom of Speech" was shattered after seen previous POTUS account vanishes from Twitter.
That's delusional thinking on their part then. There's obviously an enormous difference. Which is why we're able to freely have this conversation on HN.
In China it's a blanket national policy. There is zero free speech in China, as determined by the government. You are not free to set up your own service, blog, site, etc. to skirt that.
Trump is a billionaire and is free to start his own social platform, which has been discussed by his camp on multiple occasions since the coordinated social media bans. He has drastically more resources than he needs to launch a platform to push his voice in any way he sees fit.
Trump wasn't censored by the US Government. Private social media companies decided they disagreed with how he was behaving and or what he was saying.
As someone that isn't a billionaire, before the day is out, with an hour of time, I could choose from any number of dozens of hosts and push a new communication platform out to the world, whether a blog or other. Or just sign up for Substack and say what I think there. I can use it to rant endlessly about politicians, government, ideology, Covid, nearly anything I see fit to say.
You can do none of that in China. The context could hardly be any more different when it comes to speech, between the US and China.
That's delusional thinking on their part then. There's obviously an enormous difference. Which is why we're able to freely have this conversation on HN.
In China it's a blanket national policy. There is zero free speech in China, as determined by the government. You are not free to set up your own service, blog, site, etc. to skirt that.
Trump is a billionaire and is free to start his own social platform, which has been discussed by his camp on multiple occasions since the coordinated social media bans. He has drastically more resources than he needs to launch a platform to push his voice in any way he sees fit.
Trump wasn't censored by the US Government. Private social media companies decided they disagreed with how he was behaving and or what he was saying.
As someone that isn't a billionaire, before the day is out, with an hour of time, I could choose from any number of dozens of hosts and push a new communication platform out to the world, whether a blog or other. Or just sign up for Substack and say what I think there. I can use it to rant endlessly about politicians, government, ideology, Covid, nearly anything I see fit to say.
You can do none of that in China. The context could hardly be any more different when it comes to speech, between the US and China.
> Many Chinese believer of "Freedom of Speech" was shattered after seen previous POTUS account vanishes from Twitter. This echoes the memory of their own accounts purged from Weibo.
Sounds like they are missing out on US Civics 101 then - makes sense since Americans are the only people who take that.
Sounds like they are missing out on US Civics 101 then - makes sense since Americans are the only people who take that.
> Many Chinese believer of "Freedom of Speech" was shattered after seen previous POTUS account vanishes from Twitter.
It should be remembered that Trump was not kicked off of Twitter until after a literal insurrection which he had helped to incite. It's not entirely clear if Trump's speech crosses the very high bar set by Brandenburg v Ohio, which you should recall holds that advocating violent overthrow of the government is First Amendment-protected free speech, but that it is toeing that line means that said speech would be outright illegal in most countries.
It should be remembered that Trump was not kicked off of Twitter until after a literal insurrection which he had helped to incite. It's not entirely clear if Trump's speech crosses the very high bar set by Brandenburg v Ohio, which you should recall holds that advocating violent overthrow of the government is First Amendment-protected free speech, but that it is toeing that line means that said speech would be outright illegal in most countries.
This moral ambiguity is the underlying thrust in almost all comparative Sino/Western discussions, it just doesn't work.
Removing false information from some public social networking sites (and all sorts of other things like violent threats, depictions of violent crimes, kiddie porn etc), is not the same thing as removing arbitrary comments, information about the CCP, imprisoning or killing journalists and citizens for speaking basic, actual truths.
Westerners are absolutely free to post COVID rubbish, or say almost anything they want about 'the President' on their own websites and communications if they want to.
That said, it's going to take more data from these supposed financial posts (and more transparency on their sources) in order for us to give it legitimacy.
Removing false information from some public social networking sites (and all sorts of other things like violent threats, depictions of violent crimes, kiddie porn etc), is not the same thing as removing arbitrary comments, information about the CCP, imprisoning or killing journalists and citizens for speaking basic, actual truths.
Westerners are absolutely free to post COVID rubbish, or say almost anything they want about 'the President' on their own websites and communications if they want to.
That said, it's going to take more data from these supposed financial posts (and more transparency on their sources) in order for us to give it legitimacy.
'With real estate composing 30% of the economy, domestic spillage into other areas of the economy is inevitable. In the end, it boils down to one thing that has been a long time coming for a decade, crisis.'
With the power and inflation crises in the west, my concern is superpowers war.
With the power and inflation crises in the west, my concern is superpowers war.
> With the power and inflation crises in the west, my concern is superpowers war.
One of the biggest benefits of so thoroughly intertwining our economies is that this is exceptionally unlikely. China can't war its way out of a debt crisis, because that war would be against its biggest customers, and biggest sources of cash flow.
One of the biggest benefits of so thoroughly intertwining our economies is that this is exceptionally unlikely. China can't war its way out of a debt crisis, because that war would be against its biggest customers, and biggest sources of cash flow.
"By the grace of God almighty, and the pressures of the marketplace, the human race has civilized itself" -- Roger Waters, /It's A Miracle/, _Amused_To_Death_
[deleted]
I would be worried about the 30% real estate part. That doesn't sound healthy when you consider that China is a manufacturing powerhouse.
Meanwhile some western nations just see some mild inflation that was very common 30 years ago.
If you want to see a "horror story" look at the UK and the effects of Brexit.
Meanwhile some western nations just see some mild inflation that was very common 30 years ago.
If you want to see a "horror story" look at the UK and the effects of Brexit.
Sub 10% per annum inflation is hardly a crisis.
Note that traditionally hyper inflation (which people often seem to conflate with our current status) is defined by economists to be 50% per month. The west is a long, long way from any sort of real crisis caused by inflation.
Note that traditionally hyper inflation (which people often seem to conflate with our current status) is defined by economists to be 50% per month. The west is a long, long way from any sort of real crisis caused by inflation.
That's the thing when you deal with exponents. Everything seems low until suddenly it isn't anymore. That's part of the reason why we handled the Covid pandemic so badly also, humans tend to be shit at exponential thinking[1][2].
Hyperinflation tends to work in an exponential fashion. Perhaps we aren't at the bottom of an exponential curve for this period of inflation, perhaps it can be prevented from going too high like it has in the past for the US (I still want to believe that's the case, but I'm converting my fiat into assets just in case that's wrong). But it's far from a guarantee.
There's many countries suffering from hyperinflation out there in the world today that probably acted similarly when they were at the same stage as we are right now.
[1]: https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2020/07/16/Exponential-Growth-Pr...
[2]: https://purposefocuscommitment.medium.com/the-rice-and-the-c...
Hyperinflation tends to work in an exponential fashion. Perhaps we aren't at the bottom of an exponential curve for this period of inflation, perhaps it can be prevented from going too high like it has in the past for the US (I still want to believe that's the case, but I'm converting my fiat into assets just in case that's wrong). But it's far from a guarantee.
There's many countries suffering from hyperinflation out there in the world today that probably acted similarly when they were at the same stage as we are right now.
[1]: https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2020/07/16/Exponential-Growth-Pr...
[2]: https://purposefocuscommitment.medium.com/the-rice-and-the-c...
There is nothing less exponential about a 2% inflation target than there is about a 5% rate or even a 10% rate of inflation. All discussions about inflation are exponential in nature.
The differences between 2,5,10 percent per annum vs almost 13000% inflation per annum are just categorically different, and you don’t get there by accident.
The differences between 2,5,10 percent per annum vs almost 13000% inflation per annum are just categorically different, and you don’t get there by accident.
I never claimed we are getting there by accident. There's plenty of unprecedented shit the past couple of years coupled with policy decisions that have accumulated over time that's put us in a potentially precarious position.
And sure, they're a different category (as I said, the US has had high inflation but not hyperinflation in the past and we've recovered from it, like in the 70s). But just because the US hasn't shifted from one category to the other in the past, doesn't mean it couldn't this time.
You are right about all inflation itself being exponential, but I think you mean prices, whereas I'm talking about the percentages. You can't be talking about percentages because you're saying it's only going up 2, 5, 10% at the most (roughly).
Just take Venezuela. In less than 2 years (from 2018 to 2019), their inflation percentage jumped from 9% to 10,000,000%. I.e. they went from your first category to an exponential increase in the inflation percentage. It can happen very quickly once the ball gets rolling enough.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/02/venezuela-inflation-at-10-mi...
And sure, they're a different category (as I said, the US has had high inflation but not hyperinflation in the past and we've recovered from it, like in the 70s). But just because the US hasn't shifted from one category to the other in the past, doesn't mean it couldn't this time.
You are right about all inflation itself being exponential, but I think you mean prices, whereas I'm talking about the percentages. You can't be talking about percentages because you're saying it's only going up 2, 5, 10% at the most (roughly).
Just take Venezuela. In less than 2 years (from 2018 to 2019), their inflation percentage jumped from 9% to 10,000,000%. I.e. they went from your first category to an exponential increase in the inflation percentage. It can happen very quickly once the ball gets rolling enough.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/02/venezuela-inflation-at-10-mi...
Plenty of things are possible, but just because something could happen, does not mean that it is likely.
The west is not on the brink of runaway inflation by any means. It wasn’t in the 1970s either. Hyperinflation has historically only occurred under very specific circumstances, typically after widespread devastation due to war or outright government collapse.
Edit: to add a response to the case of Venezuela, the 9% inflation rate had nothing to do with the ensuing hyperinflation. It’s not as if people’s expectations got out of control. They relied heavily on oil exports and oil production collapsed due to state mismanagement. They could’ve had 0% inflation to begin with and still would have been in this situation.
The west is not on the brink of runaway inflation by any means. It wasn’t in the 1970s either. Hyperinflation has historically only occurred under very specific circumstances, typically after widespread devastation due to war or outright government collapse.
Edit: to add a response to the case of Venezuela, the 9% inflation rate had nothing to do with the ensuing hyperinflation. It’s not as if people’s expectations got out of control. They relied heavily on oil exports and oil production collapsed due to state mismanagement. They could’ve had 0% inflation to begin with and still would have been in this situation.
I don't even think it's that likely myself, although if I had to pick a percentage chance of it happening in the next five years I suspect would be much higher than yours (if I had to give a number today, I'd give it a 7% chance).
Great Britain I'd peg a bit higher, around a 12% chance, based on some articles I've been reading about their Brexit and supply chain issues.
Great Britain I'd peg a bit higher, around a 12% chance, based on some articles I've been reading about their Brexit and supply chain issues.
Do you really believe there is a 1 in 6 chance the UK sees hyperinflation?
They aren’t even at their 20th century high point yet, and even then they didn’t crack 30% per annum. [1]
[1] https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/time...
They aren’t even at their 20th century high point yet, and even then they didn’t crack 30% per annum. [1]
[1] https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/time...
No, most countries suffering from hyperinflation either got bombed, hit by massive sanctions on their primary industry or intentionally shut down their agriculture industry.
Yes, I am talking about the Weimar Republic, Venezuela and Zimbabwe.
Yes, I am talking about the Weimar Republic, Venezuela and Zimbabwe.
Inflation crisis? For the first half of my life inflation was very rarely below 5%.
So you think third world levels of inflation are normal?
Is it your assertion that at 5-10% inflation, the US economy would fall to third world status? I’m not sure what your intended connotation is here, but it would seem that the equation of mildly elevated inflation with “third world levels” is that these numbers foretell some sort of impending doom rather than some mild challenges for investors and supply chain managers.
This article with sweeping generalizations about very complex issues has been written by someone that thinks that "behemoths" is written as "bemouths" and has not been proofread as far as the third line.
> As an expert on the Chinese real estate market (I first heard of Evergrande 3 days ago), I can tell you the situation is very bad.
https://twitter.com/Cokedupoptions/status/143980011582110105...
https://twitter.com/Cokedupoptions/status/143980011582110105...
Having trouble spelling doesn’t make you stupid.
> Having trouble spelling doesn’t make you stupid
It does suggest that what you’re reading hasn’t been proofed. That increases the chances of other, more significant errors, e.g. ones in fact checking, logic or thoroughness.
It does suggest that what you’re reading hasn’t been proofed. That increases the chances of other, more significant errors, e.g. ones in fact checking, logic or thoroughness.
That's what spell checkers are for. There is a point at which poor spelling will begin to undermine the legitimacy of your thoughts as the reader becomes dubious as to the care you put into writing it. I do not think this is necessarily the case with this article, but just wanted to illustrate that correct spelling is valuable.
It does show a lack of care though.
I think OP's point is that rather than some authoritative oracle, this guy is just a guy.
He makes interesting points, but take them all with a grain of salt.
I think OP's point is that rather than some authoritative oracle, this guy is just a guy.
He makes interesting points, but take them all with a grain of salt.
No but it does if you are writing a essay on the economy. And since this is a service that provides "snapshot" articles on the world, spelling is important.
The two are strongly correlated though.
not according to the wikipedia dyslexia defintion:
"is a disorder characterized by difficulty reading in individuals with otherwise unaffected intelligence"
Yes, I'm aware. I am dyslexic. That said, I know I am dyslexic, and I spell-check because of it, especially if I'm writing a website that is "building a voice of objective journalism" [1].
[1] https://www.brookfieldbrief.com/resources
[1] https://www.brookfieldbrief.com/resources
It would still fail in school, regardless of how smart the student is. Having someone edit before publishing always makes sense even if your English is absolutely perfect. If you make such glaring spelling mistakes and ignore the coloured squiggly underscore, what other words and phrases leave the reader with the wrong perception or meaning?
I have found that those who are laser focused on spelling and grammar tend to lack a proclivity for novel thought. As such when confronted with new ideas, rather than dismissing the idea based on some sort of logical flaw they dismiss it based on superficial surface level details.
I have found that those who find other to lack a proclivity for novel thought due to obeying spelling and grammar and promoting the correct usage to be insufferable arseholes.
As such, I dismiss their dismissals as the ravings of a fool.
"Some more words to make this seem more profound a thought than it is."
As such, I dismiss their dismissals as the ravings of a fool.
"Some more words to make this seem more profound a thought than it is."
Dismissals due to minor details about the medium or the speaker themselves isn't intellectual inquiry, it's a personality contest. I'm looking for truth even if it means the people I don't like are right.
It means there is a higher probability of being stupid.
Maybe this article is interesting, but I'll never know. I can't read that thin black font on the bright white background. Hurts to try to focus on it.
Click reader mode in your browser instead of complaining about it here?
Why not both?
Could be much worse, like the super popular "dark gray font on a light grey background."
> annual marriages declining by 40% from their peak in 2013
Does anyone known what is the cause of this?
Does anyone known what is the cause of this?
From what I’ve seen, it’s similar to most other developing -> more developed countries. Specifically:
- people are getting more education. So instead of getting hitched at 18 they are still in school at 22, 23
- more financial burden with raising family (getting married usually equals kids)
- more financial independence. People don’t need to pair up to get by anymore. Also don’t need the extra labor from kids either
- changes in cultural expectation. In china women are mostly still expected to get married young, but it’s rapidly changing. Being a single man / woman isn’t as much of an issue as it was before.
- people are getting more education. So instead of getting hitched at 18 they are still in school at 22, 23
- more financial burden with raising family (getting married usually equals kids)
- more financial independence. People don’t need to pair up to get by anymore. Also don’t need the extra labor from kids either
- changes in cultural expectation. In china women are mostly still expected to get married young, but it’s rapidly changing. Being a single man / woman isn’t as much of an issue as it was before.
Perhaps because there is a strong cultural requirement in China for a groom to have his own house before getting married. If real estate gets more expensive in a bubble, so does marriage, and there is less of it.
Just like many cultural conditionings this one seems particularly unfair. Why just the broom? Why can't they both work towards the goal?
Because societies where the bride’s parents have to pay a dowry invariably lead to female infanticide, as in India, not that China doesn’t have that problem, but it was caused by the one-child policy and families not wanting the family name to die out.
Dowry is a terrible idea. However, turning 180 degrees and putting all financial burden of marriage on the male seems just as bad.
That's what the introduction of Islam did in Arabia. They went from a situation where the bride's parents paid the groom a dowry (with the predictable female infanticide) to one where the groom paid the bride (not her parents) a mahr or "bridal gift" that is a security for her if the marriage is dissolved.
[deleted]
Articles started commonly appearing ~6-8 years ago about that topic re China. The explanation most of them gave, from interviewing people in China that were actively making decisions about marriage, had to do with financial challenges in terms of affording it. The people being interviewed usually would talk about marriage being a formula, involving a certain financial context, and that they were putting off getting married because they had other financial obligations (liabilities or otherwise) that needed to come first.
After the great recession era (~2008 forward) Chinese consumers noticeably started loading up on debt. Household debt went from being very modest to being a serious issue. Particularly their debt is a lot more expensive in China, their household debt to income ratio is increasingly dire.
Chart: https://i.imgur.com/C0vnLKZ.png
After the great recession era (~2008 forward) Chinese consumers noticeably started loading up on debt. Household debt went from being very modest to being a serious issue. Particularly their debt is a lot more expensive in China, their household debt to income ratio is increasingly dire.
Chart: https://i.imgur.com/C0vnLKZ.png
It is actually about freedom. Basically when you have more choices, marriage is not something you do automatically when you reach the age. Marriage is stronger when people are financially weak. In poor countries, marriage can happen in very young age because of the financial benefit of it.
Interesting. I wonder if it is a consequence of the "one child" policy.
That is, if you're an only child, you have to support your parents in their old age (or at least be prepared to do so). That leaves you less prepared to take on the financial obligations of marriage.
That is, if you're an only child, you have to support your parents in their old age (or at least be prepared to do so). That leaves you less prepared to take on the financial obligations of marriage.
As to the font, grammatical errors, or silly East-West quotations: Daniel Kahneman reminds us that the way to judge an expert in an unfamiliar subject is to ask what his or her experience is in that subject. Not how well they speak.
Unfortunately, I've never heard of brookfieldbrief, so that doesn't help any. Has anyone?
Unfortunately, I've never heard of brookfieldbrief, so that doesn't help any. Has anyone?
I don't know if Evergrande is the beginning, or the huge amount of Chinese local government debt[1], but I am more concerned about Variable Interest Entities [2]
So, when these Chinese firms are trading on US exchanges, they aren't trading in the actual stock, but instead, the VIE. It will only take China outlawing VIEs to wipe them out. While there is an active debate about that, there are many reasons why it would be in the Chinese interest to do so, namely, the use of VIEs as a means for Chinese expats to liberate cash from China, and, China's reduced control of company VIEs. During wartime, or as a lever, this could be fully weaponized.
Due to the VIE structure and presence on exchanges, they are much more likely to be included in ETFs. Talk about a potential for huge losses!
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-29/china-hid...
[2] https://www.ubs.com/global/en/wealth-management/chief-invest...
So, when these Chinese firms are trading on US exchanges, they aren't trading in the actual stock, but instead, the VIE. It will only take China outlawing VIEs to wipe them out. While there is an active debate about that, there are many reasons why it would be in the Chinese interest to do so, namely, the use of VIEs as a means for Chinese expats to liberate cash from China, and, China's reduced control of company VIEs. During wartime, or as a lever, this could be fully weaponized.
Due to the VIE structure and presence on exchanges, they are much more likely to be included in ETFs. Talk about a potential for huge losses!
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-29/china-hid...
[2] https://www.ubs.com/global/en/wealth-management/chief-invest...
Very similar situation in Canada, systematically. Avg. home prices gain in value more than average pre-tax incomes, which is absurd, and depends on every increasing numbers of warm bodies to work at Tim Horton's or to get Accounting degrees and work for US Big4 firms based in Toronto etc.. I's not a sustainable situation and politicians will not talk about it, because the top 60% who own homes are more likely to vote and have influence than the bottom 40%. It's the actual 'class war' most people in positions of influence are wary to talk about.
Very interesting. Seems to me 'the West' is slowly moving towards a more Chinese world view.