There’s a China-Shaped Hole in the Global Economy
Kanebridge News
    HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $1,617,430 (-0.29%)       Melbourne $983,992 (+0.22%)       Brisbane $1,009,807 (-0.35%)       Adelaide $906,751 (+1.13%)       Perth $909,874 (+0.75%)       Hobart $736,941 (+0.17%)       Darwin $686,749 (+1.64%)       Canberra $966,289 (-0.61%)       National $1,049,206 (-0.00%)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $766,563 (+0.96%)       Melbourne $496,920 (-0.51%)       Brisbane $594,946 (-0.69%)       Adelaide $471,433 (-1.10%)       Perth $470,780 (+0.05%)       Hobart $511,407 (+0.29%)       Darwin $390,827 (+5.09%)       Canberra $473,306 (-0.38%)       National $543,725 (+0.24%)                HOUSES FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 11,294 (+339)       Melbourne 15,418 (-206)       Brisbane 8,328 (+106)       Adelaide 2,290 (+107)       Perth 6,015 (+41)       Hobart 1,117 (+4)       Darwin 282 (+1)       Canberra 1,069 (+44)       National 45,813 (+436)                UNITS FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 9,483 (+156)       Melbourne 8,805 (+44)       Brisbane 1,732 (+14)       Adelaide 433 (+26)       Perth 1,443 (-2)       Hobart 188 (+12)       Darwin 369 (-2)       Canberra 1,049 (+3)       National 23,502 (+251)                HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $800 ($0)       Melbourne $610 ($0)       Brisbane $640 ($0)       Adelaide $610 (+$10)       Perth $660 ($0)       Hobart $550 ($0)       Darwin $750 (+$25)       Canberra $670 ($0)       National $670 (+$5)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $750 ($0)       Melbourne $580 ($0)       Brisbane $620 ($0)       Adelaide $500 ($0)       Perth $610 (-$10)       Hobart $450 ($0)       Darwin $580 ($0)       Canberra $550 ($0)       National $592 (-$1)                HOUSES FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 5,754 (-19)       Melbourne 6,704 (+157)       Brisbane 4,270 (+30)       Adelaide 1,344 (-9)       Perth 2,367 (-11)       Hobart 271 (-22)       Darwin 88 (0)       Canberra 520 (-13)       National 21,318 (+113)                UNITS FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 9,969 (-121)       Melbourne 6,440 (+1)       Brisbane 2,292 (+7)       Adelaide 370 (-4)       Perth 636 (-35)       Hobart 114 (-6)       Darwin 178 (+18)       Canberra 808 (+9)       National 20,807 (-131)                HOUSE ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND       Sydney 2.57% (↑)        Melbourne 3.22% (↓)     Brisbane 3.30% (↑)      Adelaide 3.50% (↑)        Perth 3.77% (↓)       Hobart 3.88% (↓)     Darwin 5.68% (↑)      Canberra 3.61% (↑)      National 3.32% (↑)             UNIT ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 5.09% (↓)     Melbourne 6.07% (↑)      Brisbane 5.42% (↑)      Adelaide 5.52% (↑)        Perth 6.74% (↓)       Hobart 4.58% (↓)       Darwin 7.72% (↓)     Canberra 6.04% (↑)        National 5.66% (↓)            HOUSE RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 0.8% (↑)      Melbourne 0.7% (↑)      Brisbane 0.7% (↑)      Adelaide 0.4% (↑)      Perth 0.4% (↑)      Hobart 0.9% (↑)      Darwin 0.8% (↑)      Canberra 1.0% (↑)      National 0.7% (↑)             UNIT RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 0.9% (↑)      Melbourne 1.1% (↑)      Brisbane 1.0% (↑)      Adelaide 0.5% (↑)      Perth 0.5% (↑)      Hobart 1.4% (↑)      Darwin 1.7% (↑)      Canberra 1.4% (↑)      National 1.1% (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL HOUSES AND TREND         Sydney 30.9 (↓)       Melbourne 33.2 (↓)     Brisbane 33.0 (↑)        Adelaide 25.3 (↓)       Perth 35.4 (↓)     Hobart 38.5 (↑)        Darwin 42.4 (↓)       Canberra 32.4 (↓)       National 33.9 (↓)            AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL UNITS AND TREND         Sydney 31.9 (↓)       Melbourne 34.3 (↓)       Brisbane 30.0 (↓)     Adelaide 25.1 (↑)        Perth 34.9 (↓)       Hobart 32.8 (↓)     Darwin 44.8 (↑)      Canberra 40.8 (↑)        National 34.3 (↓)           
Share Button

There’s a China-Shaped Hole in the Global Economy

China’s low-consuming, high-investing economy guarantees conflict with other countries

By GREG IP
Sat, Aug 31, 2024 7:00amGrey Clock 4 min

China’s economy is unusual. Whereas consumers contribute 50% to 75% of gross domestic product in other major economies, in China they account for 40%. Investment, such as in property, infrastructure and factories, and exports provide most of the rest.

Lately, that low consumption has become a headwind to China’s growth because property investment, once a major component of demand, has collapsed.

This isn’t just a problem for China; it’s a problem for the whole world. What Chinese companies can’t sell to Chinese consumers, they export. The result: an annual trade surplus in goods now of almost $900 billion, or 0.8% of global gross domestic product. That surplus effectively requires other countries to run trade deficits.

China’s surplus, long a sore spot in the U.S., increasingly is one elsewhere, too. While China’s 12-month trade balance with the U.S. has risen by $49 billion since 2019, it’s up $72 billion with the European Union, $74 billion with Japan and Asia’s newly industrialised economies, and about $240 billion with the rest of the world, according to data compiled by Brad Setser of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Logan Wright , head of China research at Rhodium Group, a U.S. research firm, said China accounts for just 13% of the world’s consumption but 28% of its investment. That investment only makes sense if China takes market share away from other countries, rendering their own manufacturing investment unviable, he said.

“China’s growth model is dependent at this point on a more confrontational approach with the rest of the world,” he said.

While many developing countries relied on investment and exports to fuel early growth, China is an outlier for how low its consumption is, and its sheer size. In a report, Rhodium estimates that if China’s consumption share equaled that of the European Union or Japan, its annual household spending would be $9 trillion instead of $6.7 trillion. That $2.3 trillion difference—roughly the GDP of Italy—is equal to a 2% hole in global demand.

The sources of this underconsumption are deeply embedded in both China’s fiscal systems and its policy choices.

Chinese incomes are highly unequal, and because the rich spend less of their income than the poor, this automatically depresses consumption. Rhodium cites data that says the top 10% of households had 69% of total savings, while a third had negative saving rates.

Other countries address such disparities by taxing the rich more heavily and boosting the spending power of lower and middle classes through cash transfers, and public health and education. China does much less of this. Just 8% of its tax revenue comes from personal income taxes, compared with 38% from value-added taxes, similar to sales taxes, which fall much more heavily on lower-income families, Rhodium estimates.

China also spends less on health and education than major market economies, forcing poor and middle-income families to spend more of their disposable income on both.

Meanwhile, suppressed wages and interest rates depress household income and spending while boosting the profits of state-owned enterprises. The limited taxing authority of local governments forces them to raise revenue by selling property for manufacturing and infrastructure, which further inflates investment.

A decade ago top Chinese policymakers shared Western economists’ perspective that, at the macro level, China needed to rebalance away from investment to consumption. In 2013, the ruling Communist Party said growth would henceforth rely on market forces and consumers.

President Xi Jinping ended up going in the opposite direction; consumption stayed weak while state control over the economy grew. He has replaced reformers with loyalists more preoccupied with sector-specific targets than overall growth.

The bedrock principle behind trade is comparative advantage: countries specialise in what they do best and then export it in exchange for imports. Xi rejects this principle. In pursuit of “independence and self-reliance,” he wants China to make as much and import as little as possible.

Officials in China boast that it is the “only country to produce in every single one of the United Nations’ industrial product categories,” notes Andrew Batson of Gavekal Dragonomics.

Even as China targets advanced products such as electric vehicles and semiconductors, it refuses to surrender market share in lower-value products: “Establish the new before breaking the old,” Xi has instructed his bureaucrats , my colleagues have reported.

As a result, Rhodium argues , “China provides fewer opportunities as an export market for emerging countries while competing head-on with them in the low-tech and mid-tech space.”

Countries that once saw China as a customer now see a competitor. “Many Chinese businesses are manufacturing intermediate goods, which we mainly export,” Rhee Chang-yong , the governor of the Bank of Korea, said last year. “The decadelong support from the Chinese economic boom has disappeared.”

Mexican Finance Minister Rogelio Ramírez de la O complained last month , “China sells to us but doesn’t buy from us and that’s not reciprocal trade.”

Ironically, foreign officials have tended to see the U.S. as the biggest threat to the world trade system, ever since President Donald Trump in 2018 imposed steep tariffs on China and narrower tariffs on other trading partners. He has promised to expand those tariffs if elected this fall.

And yet Trump’s tariffs should be seen as a reaction to China’s beggar-thy-neighbour economic model, one that has proved impervious to existing trade rules.

Still, no single country can fix the problem. Like a dike deflecting floodwaters, U.S. tariffs have diverted Chinese exports to other markets.

Those other countries are now taking action. Mexico, Chile, Indonesia and Turkey have all announced or said they are considering tariffs on China this year. This week Canada announced steep new tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, steel and aluminum, aligning with those already announced by the U.S.

Yet the world thus far lacks a unified solution to Chinese underconsumption, because China refuses to accept that it’s a problem.

Xi has rejected fiscal support for households as “welfarism” that breeds laziness. In April, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen complained that China’s “weak household consumption and business overinvestment” were threatening jobs in the U.S. The state news agency Xinhua called it a pretext for protectionism. Earlier this month the International Monetary Fund advised Beijing to spend 5.5% of GDP over four years buying up uncompleted homes. Beijing politely declined.

With China dug in, more friction is sure to follow, and an already fragile world trading system will be stressed to its breaking point.



MOST POPULAR
11 ACRES ROAD, KELLYVILLE, NSW

This stylish family home combines a classic palette and finishes with a flexible floorplan

35 North Street Windsor

Just 55 minutes from Sydney, make this your creative getaway located in the majestic Hawkesbury region.

Related Stories
Money
Starbucks’ North America Head to Retire One Week After New CEO Started
By Evie Liu 17/09/2024
Money
How Russia Profits From Ukraine Invasion by Selling Stolen Grain on a Global Black Market
By BENOIT FAUCON 16/09/2024
Money
Jack Ma Urges Alibaba to Trust in Market Forces, Innovation
By JIAHUI HUANG 11/09/2024
Starbucks’ North America Head to Retire One Week After New CEO Started
By Evie Liu
Tue, Sep 17, 2024 < 1 min

Starbucks is making another major leadership change just one week after new CEO Brian Niccol started his job.

Michael Conway, the 58-year-old coffee chain’s head of North America, will be retiring at the end of November, according to a Monday filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The decision came only six months after Conway took on the job. His position won’t be filled. Instead, the company plans to seek candidates for a new role in charge of Starbucks’ global branding.

The chief brand officer role will have responsibilities across product, marketing, digital, customer insights, creative and store concepts.

“Recognizing the unmatched capabilities of the Starbucks team and seeing the energy and enthusiasm for Brian’s early vision, I could not think of a better time to begin my transition towards retirement,” wrote Conway in a statement.

Conway has been at Starbucks for more than a decade, and was promoted to his current job—a newly created role—back in March, as part of the company’s structural leadership change under former CEO Laxman Narasimhan.

The coffee giant has been struggling with weaker sales in recent quarters, as it faces not only macroeconomic headwinds, but also operational, branding, and product development challenges.

Narasimhan was taking many moves to turn around the business, but faced increasing pressure from the board, shareholders, and activist investors.

One month ago, Starbucks ousted Narasimhan and appointed Brian Niccol, the former CEO at Chipotle, as its top executive. The stock has since jumped 20% in a show of faith for Niccol, who started at Starbucks last week.

When he was at Chipotle, Niccol made a few executive hires that were key to the company’s turnaround.

MOST POPULAR
11 ACRES ROAD, KELLYVILLE, NSW

This stylish family home combines a classic palette and finishes with a flexible floorplan

35 North Street Windsor

Just 55 minutes from Sydney, make this your creative getaway located in the majestic Hawkesbury region.

Related Stories
Money
Why 1.6 million Aussies have secret savings accounts
By Bronwyn Allen 30/07/2024
Property
Property of the week: 33 Hilltop Rd, Avalon Beach
By Kirsten Craze 16/08/2024
Money
After Pandemic Slowdown, Global Wealth Is Growing Once Again, Led by the U.S.
By GEOFF NUDELMAN 14/07/2024
0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop