From: vagans@inanna.eanna.net   
      
   In article ,   
   Zap  wrote:   
      
      
      
   >> While I don't have the hard figures to back up my hunch, I do   
   >> have the impression that consumers in China are still in the   
   >> early stages of development, shall we say. Ordinary cell phones   
   >> that are cheap in the West cost of the order of a month's income   
   >> for most consumers in the cities.   
   >>   
   >> Thus I believe most goods manufactured in China are for   
   >> Western consumers while the Chinese are targeted from the   
   >> highest earners first, then downwards. In 5 years time all   
   >> this may have changed totally.   
      
   I don't think a consumer economy is at the top of the Party's   
   economic agenda. I believe the notion of "consumer economy"   
   is passing from the scene worldwide since finite resources preclude   
   a global consumer economy such as we've known in the West and in   
   Japan.   
      
   The prescription of economists for China and India is for   
   them to 'prioritize domestic demand', since it is such a huge   
   potential market for all the doodads that drive our consumer   
   economy. So, they assume, what with billions of potential   
   consumers, that their domestic demand will drive the global   
   economy, now that the current consumer economies are saturated   
   with stuff and cannot grow, or cannot grow at a rate great   
   enough to generate profits.   
      
   For China, as possibly India, growth in domestic demand is a   
   a side issue -- or, at least, not the point of it all. It happens,   
   and is a necessary part of industrialization. However, unlike   
   the West, it is not the goal. The Party can encourage it or   
   discourage it, according to how they envision the goal of economic   
   policy.   
      
      
      
   >> Everything I read about China tells me that the US-China   
   >> relationship will be like the US-Japan relationship of the   
   >> 1990's multiplied by 10. The trade imbalance is growing   
   >> already and now even Japan is returning to its former   
   >> financial self and has already started buying up US debts.   
   >> Both would like to see the US spending big time but also   
   >> at the same time be certain the US will be able to pay off   
   >> its debts.   
   >>   
   >   
   >China seems to have different plans for itself. They have their own   
   >mobile standard now, instead of licensing a standard developed   
   >elsewhere they license their own standard to companies that want to   
   >make products for the Chinese market.   
   >This is already happening for the cellphone market and the digital   
   >video market.   
   >They're also very keen on developing their own sofware and silicon   
   >industry. This is a major difference with Japan.   
      
   Japan failed to participate in the pc computer boom of the 90s because   
   they were unwilling to adopt a foreign standard (WinTel). They wanted   
   a purely Japanese solution. China, otoh, just didn't want WinTel, so   
   they're onboard for Linux.   
      
   We, in the West, may not fully comprehend what motivates China's   
   policies. They have already become, and in just a few years, an   
   indispensable nation -- a term the US had reserved only for itself   
   ("The one indispensable nation") -- at least economically   
   China may see itself as soon enough "The one indispensable nation",   
   but without the Imperial trappings of superpower. "Superpower status"   
   may be the last resort of a once indispensable nation that is quickly   
   becoming economically and politically irrelevant.   
      
   --   
     (__)    Sourcerer   
    /(<>)\ O|O|O|O||O||O When you're looking for something that doesn't exist,   
     \../  |OO|||O|||O|O it makes you crazier the closer you get to it.   
      ||   OO|||OO||O||O                                   -- R. Ebert   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)