(no title)
gitah | 8 years ago
From the article, Pettis assumes the following is true:
1) China has overinvested in infrastructure and manufacturing capacity to such an extent
that in the aggregate the cost of additional
public sector investment exceeds the present
value of future increases in productivity generated by
the investment
and 2) China's long-term sustainable growth rate is substantially below the economy's current GDP growth target
Why does he make these assumptions without also analyzing the technology improvement aspect? I don't see anything about that in this article.
ryandamm|8 years ago
Basically, qualitatively, you're right. Technological improvements can generate growth from scratch. But when you look at the historical data to try to quantify it, you see it's quite modest. Big gains have come from: women entering the workforce, electrification, containerization. The rest is incremental enough it doesn't matter in the same way.
(Part of this is how it's measured; the fact that consumers get much more value for their dollar isn't well captured, but the point remains because it's about debt-servicing, not consumer value.)
mattmanser|8 years ago
My Dad used to work as a merchant seaman, I believe he got up to first officer and had passed his captain's exam.
But then the big container ships came along, and they needed a tiny fraction of the captains, officers and seaman they needed previously per tonne and he ended up coming ashore to pursue a different career. His stories from those times are pretty amazing.
gitah|8 years ago