Yes, China progress has been impressive! But don't take credit for China success while hitting at malays are home as if you have contributed to homeland success just like that shake leg Qqq3! Don't rock the 'sampan' in Malaysia!
Qqq3! You and Grandpa Koon love to bash malays in Malaysia and taking credit for China success! It's okay to acknowledge China success but not to extend creating racial divide in Malaysia! It's a very dangerous thing to do! Back in the 80s and 90s, we were very proud of been so called nation that maintain racial harmony! Until the chauvinists and 'tuan melayu' Umno and Pas fake holymen wheck havoc everything!
don't be silly, we have no problems with malays....................I find the malays the most compassionate people. America hates the poor people. Malaysia no such such problem. In Malaysia even poor can still find dignity, and government help and few homeless.
I feel KYY should be fair when downplaying the USA.. Dont forget that PRC is about 4.2 times the size of the US in terms of population...so it does have some advantages when calculating the gdp and market size.....What should really matters is the per capita income ..for which the US ranks 8 while the PRC ranks 64. It is great that PRC is progressing well..but i feel it has nothing geat to gloat about.. It has played the role of a low cost producer of american, japanese and korean products ..but the companies from these countries are moving out...While i understand KYY's sentiments, I see not see why it has to be done at the expense of the US..which we all know is way ahead on many issues that matters to ordinary citizens..Going ahead of oneself..could cause one to fall flat on the face..like what happened on all the hype on vaccines
USA is not a nation but it is an enterprise formed by various groups of violators/criminals from various parts of Europe that against their kings, governments or churches so settled in the new world founded by certain voyagers. The natives suffered and killed by these settlers. The slavery was introduced into the lands as human resources to cultivate the lands robbed or occupied through force and wars. Having managed to run away from their authorities back home, so the word FREEDOM was just being introduced to delete their names that were blacklisted by their kings/churches/queens.
There was no person/nationalist like in China, India, Indonesia, ...that fighting for their land of birth against any invasion from external force. To do that/to be nationalist, mean they will fight for cause of the red Indians. They got the idea of "democracy", a form of governing/ruling the land without a king unlike the Europeans during that period of time. Other nations have the own/respective nationalist like Tunku Abdul Rahman, Sun Yat Sen, Mahatma Gandhi, Sukarno or Chulalongkorn. Then, the got the idea of capitalism where funds/money being raised/created to move the market/economy...control the market or the whole market in the world.
China is very near to bankrupt...they could avoid bank runs by messing with people's cellphones but economy inevitably collapsing. Now 90% of SME dead, 80% of big corporation in trouble, we shall witness the biggest collapse of an economy.
China is already comfirmed bankrupt...they could avoid bank runs by messing with people's braims but economy inevitably collapsing. Now 100% of SME dead, 100% of big corporation in trouble, we now witnessing the biggest collapse of an economy. USA IS STILL STRONK
Weird. What is the purpose of discuss China and US. They not even care about small country like Malaysia. Sometimes I wonder where those supporter and hater coming from. Hilarious, if China bankruptcy then how about Malaysia, bankruptcy talk have been continuous for so many years and see what happen
China spends almost 1% of its GDP on all rail. It seems hard to believe that high speed rail by itself is a profitable dollar per dollar investment, given that a lot of the economic benefits of rail seem to be cargo on slow rail. It could be true, but with costs that high, it seems like alternative investments could be worth a higher ROI.
Overbuilding is definitely a sign of inefficiency though (unless you're going to argue that every mile they build is worth it dollar per dollar), especially since they clearly know that these new lines are going to be unprofitable. Some of the new lines definitely smell like politics and prestige projects.
With the cost of $5.9 billion USD, the HSR took six years to complete. It is a crucial "One Belt, One Road" project for Beijing. What will it bring to China, Laos, and South East Asia? Will it bring wealth or debt? It looks like Beijing will continue to push forward with its high-speed railroad to Southeast Asia. But amidst the grave economic downturn in China, Beijing will have to face the question of whether this will trigger a financial crisis of its own in turn.
China's high speed railway system will unfortunately be the country's downfall, and will plunge global economies into deep recessions. China's high speed railways systems necessitated huge amounts of debt, to the tune of $850 billion. And with a decline in travel to-and-fro smaller provincial towns, small municipality governments in China are not able to bear the huge debt burden and looming interest payments.
Just over a decade ago, in 2009, China’s first long-distance high-speed rail (HSR) service covered the 968 kilometers between Wuhan and Guangzhou at an average speed of around 350 kilometers per hour. The feat was recognized as the Communist Party of China’s “debt-fueled” response to the global financial crisis. It was a sort of a “Railway Keynesianism,” where China re-engineered its railway infrastructure to drive the demand for concrete and steel and create millions of jobs. In the decade that followed, China’s HSR network spanned over a track length of 38,000 kilometers, the highest in the world. Bagging a share of 26 percent of the country’s total railway network, HSR today connects almost every major city in China, with travel time just a couple of hours more than air travel, but with the comfort that only trains can provide.
In the mad rush to gain the rich economic dividends that the HSR delivered on several profitable lines, especially the Beijing-Shanghai and Beijing-Guangzhou lines, provincial governments across the country have blindly tried to emulate the feat. However, most of such provincial construction has ignored the low- to zero- potential of the expensive routes to attract similar volumes of passenger traffic and are running at high idle capacity. Most new HSR lines in China have witnessed a sharp decline in their “transportation density”. Measured in passenger-kilometers, it is an indicator that projects the line’s operating efficiency in terms of annual average transport volume per kilometer. For example, while the 1,318-kilometer Beijing-Shanghai HSR corridor’s transportation density was 48 million passenger-kilometers in 2015 and continues to be high, the 1,776-kilometer Lanzhou-Urumqi line has only 2.3 million passenger-kilometers of transportation density. China’s overall transportation density of HSR was 17 million passenger-kilometers in 2015, while it was 34 million passenger-kilometers for Japan’s Shinkansen in the same year.
HSR construction costs nearly three times more than a conventional rail line. Given the absence of freight tariffs, its operational viability is hinged solely on passenger fares to cover the capital expenditure and operating costs. The craze for HSR has made China neglect the construction of conventional systems, adversely affecting the balance of the country’s logistics mix. As a result, rail has consistently trailed road and water freight transport for the past several years. This has led to growing investments in polluting freight road trucks and trailers, offsetting the environmental gains resulting from HSR. But for the China Rail Corporation (CRC) that owns the HSR network, that is the least of its worries.
In the past few years, mega borrowings by provincial governments to monetize its HSR lines have created a debt trap, which is now pinching the coffers of the state-owned CRC. CRC’s financial woes started nearly four years ago when more than 60 percent of the HSR operators each lost a minimum of US $100 million in 2018. That year, the least profitable operator in Chengdu reported net loss of US $1.8 billion. In the same year, transport economists in China had predicted an impending debt crisis for the country’s HSR that was dependent on “unsustainable government subsidies with many lines incapable of repaying the interest on their debt, let alone principal”, and were caught in a vicious cycle of “raising new debt to pay off old debt”. Consequently, since 2015, CRC’s interest payments have been significantly higher than its operating profits, shrinking its bottom line.
Four years later, in March 2021, China’s State Council, the highest organ of state power, has waved a red flag to curtail investments in HSR to prevent the slide into a deepening debt trap. The new guidelines have stopped the construction of new HSR corridors, primarily on underutilized routes that are operating at less than 80 percent of prescribed capacity. For China, which has seen the length of its high-speed railway network increase by 91 percent between 2015 and 2020, the new guidelines indicate that the country’s pursuit for speed has come at a high price.
This book is the result of the author's many years of experience and observation throughout his 26 years in the stockbroking industry. It was written for general public to learn to invest based on facts and not on fantasies or hearsay....