Back in October, I laughed off the latest China GDP data as utterly fabricated.
As it turns out, I was not the only one. China expert Gordon G. Chang (author of The Coming Collapse of China) is more than skeptical — he has the data to question much of China’s growth miracle.
Spoiler alert: Its been wildly exaggerated:
“Beijing, in the 1990s, ordered factories to churn out goods in periods of low demand, and there are indications that officials are resorting to this tactic now. While optimistic analysts point to astounding car sales–up 70.5% in July, 94.7% in August and 83.6% in September–there are reports that central government officials have ordered state enterprises to buy fleets of vehicles and that these businesses are storing them in parking lots across the country. These stories are as yet unconfirmed, but they are consistent with statistics showing that gasoline sales have been flat this year–up only 6.4% in August, for instance, and sliding since then from all indications. So here’s another question: At a time when economic activity is supposedly rising at a quick pace, how can large increases in passenger vehicle sales not be accompanied by corresponding surges in fuel usage? (emhasis added)
The answer is that Beijing’s statisticians have gone back to their old tactic of making up figures to support the Politburo’s predictions. The Chinese economy is probably growing due to state-led investment, but it cannot be doing so at the rates claimed. Wen Jiabao’s stimulus plan is, above all, grossly inefficient. For all the money he is pouring into the economy, the country is getting a small return in economic output. That’s why Premier Wen, despite the high growth numbers he’s been reporting, consistently refuses to end his stimulus program. If his numbers were real, he would be worried about overheating. But he’s apparently not.”
Gee, whoever would have guessed that a Totalitarian government would lie in its official data?
Who Believes China’s ‘Bernie Madoff’ Data? (October 22nd, 2009)
China’s 8.9% Growth? No Way
Gordon G. Chang
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.