ECONOMY:CHINA : 2009-2017 ; ever since SUB-PRIME crisis of US n EUROPE > CHINA has been buying all commodities ,US Treasuries all Metals , Coal , Crude to keep the world going for last 8-9 years. Now China holds $1.5 trln ( 6% of all ) US Treasury. almost @50% of all world Metals, @50% of world Coal, more than 50% of all Commodities !
this is funded by UNSUSTAINABLE Credit Boom ( 300% debt ) from China Banking system n Local Govts (NPA is about @25%)
Last 24 months $1 trln has left China, after which China has put in Capital Control to stem the outflow.
FREE FLOAT of YUAN will devastate the valuation of ASSETs of CHINA n China will be exposed as the BIGGEST HOAX of 21st century.
As correspondent Bart D. explains, opportunities to boost productivity via new infrastructure are scarce:
Why anyone believes that building 'infrastructure' somehow promotes economic growth in this day and age (as though it were 1950’s) is delusional. The reason 'infrastructure' worked back then to build economic activity was simply because it lagged behind the burgeoning private industry. These days there is no ‘hard industry’ left to 'lag behind.' Building a bigger road between the suburbs and the Mall won’t create prosperity for anyone except the owners of the road building company. Unlike a 1950’s road linking a steelworks to a port or a Beef farm to a meatworks."
In other words, when commerce already exists but is cumbersome, infrastructure that smooths the flow yields enormous productivity gains.
One example of this from history is the construction of the first stone bridge across the Seine River in Paris. This single structure changed commerce, tourism and social relations in the city, as it enabled two carts to pass side by side and enable pedestrians to cross the river safely.
For more on this impact of a single durable, commerce-enabling bridge in Paris, read this book: How Paris Became Paris: The Invention of the Modern City.
Replacing existing infrastructure is also problematic. It may well be necessary, but since it won't boost regional productivity (since it's merely replacing existing structures), it acts as a tax on the regional economy: if the replacement costs $1 billion and generates no real gains in productivity, it is in essence a tax that bleeds capital from the economy that could have been productively invested elsewhere.
Rebuilding a bridge generates higher spending on materials and wages, but if it doesn't generate additional productive capacity equal to its cost, this additional spending (in our world, always paid for with borrowed money that accrues interest for decades to come) runs out once the project is complete, but the costs of paying for the replacement continue on for decades.
You can only be the vacuum cleaner of the world for so long...
