China already shot its stimulus load in 2009 to keep the party going.
Local / Regional governments and national banks pushed money out the door and now the malinvestment is showing up.
Their 2009 stimulus was also much larger than the USA's relative to the size of their economies and what wasn't lent to companies was spent on infrastructure. The billions upon billions they spent were on one-time projects so the low-hanging fruit is gone there.
Plus their demographics aren't very good. Their workforce population peaked in 2010 and by 2030, their projected population median age will be 43 (compared to 39 for the USA and 32 for India).
Actually, China started rushing to US Debt once the world economy started going to hell in mid / late 2008 so, well, you're wrong:
The debt on Bush's war was still growing after 2008, so regardless of whether they bought most of his war debt after 2008 or before 2008... it is still Bush's war debt, and they still bought it, so, well, I'm right.
1) As the article mentioned, the magnitude of the crash is dependent upon how it impacts the banking sector. If the banking sector goes to hell in a hand basket, that's where you see general public panic. Always important to remember that markets are rationale except when they aren't.
2) In bull to heavy bull markets, there is an established trend that in order to chase the profits required by investors, banks double down on lending funds and generally lend too much at too low of rates to unqualified investors. Until the general population/market looks at banking stocks more consistently with bonds instead of equities, you will continue to see a conflict of interest in the banking sector.
3) We will find out now how much of an impact China really has on the global equity markets. The big question to me with China has always been what are they exporting besides cheap goods? And moreover, are the cheap goods that they are exporting incapable of being produced in other countries? Sure, there's substantial imports that they take in. My gut tells me that the global impact will be less than what some would expect. In fact, I do think that the reason that Greece has received more attention than the China situation is driven by the implications of not only the EU breaking up (very real threat) and that Greece is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to crippling European debt (Spain, Italy, and I believe France are all in terrible spots right now as well). Problems in established markets will always trump problems in emerging markets.
Comments
Local / Regional governments and national banks pushed money out the door and now the malinvestment is showing up.
Their 2009 stimulus was also much larger than the USA's relative to the size of their economies and what wasn't lent to companies was spent on infrastructure. The billions upon billions they spent were on one-time projects so the low-hanging fruit is gone there.
Plus their demographics aren't very good. Their workforce population peaked in 2010 and by 2030, their projected population median age will be 43 (compared to 39 for the USA and 32 for India).
Actually, China started rushing to US Debt once the world economy started going to hell in mid / late 2008 so, well, you're wrong:
https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/us_treasury_debt_held_china_japan_us_federal_reserve_chartbuilder.png?w=640
1) As the article mentioned, the magnitude of the crash is dependent upon how it impacts the banking sector. If the banking sector goes to hell in a hand basket, that's where you see general public panic. Always important to remember that markets are rationale except when they aren't.
2) In bull to heavy bull markets, there is an established trend that in order to chase the profits required by investors, banks double down on lending funds and generally lend too much at too low of rates to unqualified investors. Until the general population/market looks at banking stocks more consistently with bonds instead of equities, you will continue to see a conflict of interest in the banking sector.
3) We will find out now how much of an impact China really has on the global equity markets. The big question to me with China has always been what are they exporting besides cheap goods? And moreover, are the cheap goods that they are exporting incapable of being produced in other countries? Sure, there's substantial imports that they take in. My gut tells me that the global impact will be less than what some would expect. In fact, I do think that the reason that Greece has received more attention than the China situation is driven by the implications of not only the EU breaking up (very real threat) and that Greece is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to crippling European debt (Spain, Italy, and I believe France are all in terrible spots right now as well). Problems in established markets will always trump problems in emerging markets.
breadrice lines will be epic.