Empty Cities: China's phony construction boom

[sgd]

if many people in china in agriculture is good at least they feeding themselves and others. Once they stop and start working in factory somebody will have to do the farming to feed them.

That 1 million tonnes rice order from thailand is just deserts main course haven't come.

We small country already consume around 280,000 tonnes of rice a year, china is 240 time bigger than us in population. Just for prespectives if you multiply 280k by 240 that's 67million tonnes of rice they need every year. Thailand annual rice production in 2010 is just 31 million tonnes. Global production is around 672million tonnes a year so china demand is 10% of that.

If china stopped farming tomorrow we no need to eat thai fragrant rice already.

http://www.geohive.com/charts/ag_rice.aspx

[freedom]

You have no logic. Do you know how much a farmer in China can earn by farming?

The price of grains in China is controlled by the government. There isn't much profit for the farmers. What nonsense are you talking about "at least they feeding themselves and others". They are only feeding others, not themselves.

I applaud the action Chinese government taking. At least they are buying something meaningful and required.

The rest of the world, get ready for the real price of food.

[sgd]

You have no logic. Do you know how much a farmer in China can earn by farming?

The price of grains in China is controlled by the government. There isn't much profit for the farmers. What nonsense are you talking about "at least they feeding themselves and others". They are only feeding others, not themselves.

I applaud the action Chinese government taking. At least they are buying something meaningful and required.

The rest of the world, get ready for the real price of food.

why do I care what they earn as long as they don't disrupt the food prices is all that matters, would you be willing to pay $100 one day for a bag of rice or $10 for a loaf of bread are you insane?

luckily there's more sane people like us around.

[specuvestor]

So those so called "empty cities" can be easily filled by almost 1 billion farmers freed from agriculture. Industrial farming is the future, Chinese government knows it and is preparing for farmer transitions.

The problem in China for food security is about not enough farmland, not about not enough people working in agriculture.

China has too many people working in agriculture, not too few...

The productivity is so low in China that the cost of producing grains is too high.....

You already got the urban/rural ratio wrong. The trend is clear what the Chinese govt is doing. % of rural going down is obvious that needs no reiteration, unlike say other large population 3rd world like India or Indo

agriculture is one of the most unproductive industry in the world though very important. The same for mining and property industry.

If too many people are working in the unproductive industries, though they may be rich, the society as a whole will not progress well.

It is about time for China to move most of its people in the agriculture to manufacturing and services.

It always seems that you prefer exaggerating a small part of an argument to the extreme, which makes the whole discussion meaningless. haha.

I think the word "most" would fit "exaggerating", even if you put the word "one of" infront. As usual if there is nothing meaningful from you and just making me more puzzled, no point feeding you.

[freedom]

You know the productivity I am referring to is about economic value added. and your reply showed that you knew it and even agreed that agriculture indeed does not add much value to the economy. So am I exaggerating saying agriculture is one of the most unproductive? What's your point of argument? for the sake of argument?

[specuvestor]

I stated finance as an example of high value add but unproductive. They are two different things or are you arguing for the sake of arguing. Or are you unaware of the implicit difference. That's the same premise for the call to people to study engineering rather than finance.

Your world is all about $ as guage but not everything is about econom$cs when we look at the real world. Like you like to say do "get real"

[freedom]

So those so called "empty cities" can be easily filled by almost 1 billion farmers freed from agriculture. Industrial farming is the future, Chinese government knows it and is preparing for farmer transitions.

The problem in China for food security is about not enough farmland, not about not enough people working in agriculture.

China has too many people working in agriculture, not too few...

The productivity is so low in China that the cost of producing grains is too high.....

You already got the urban/rural ratio wrong. The trend is clear what the Chinese govt is doing. % of rural going down is obvious that needs no reiteration, unlike say other large population 3rd world like India or Indo

If you just read headline news, yes, the urban/rural ratio is growing fast in China. The reality is not headline news.

People who are working in the cities does not belong to the city, not so different from the immigration workers in Singapore compared with local Singaporean. Or you are implying that they are the same?

Most of those workers are still not city dwellers though they have left rural areas. They still have right to the farmland in the rural areas. They are still treated differently in the city. They are still willing to go back as a farmer if farming gives them better living. Most of them go back to their home during Chinese New Year no matter whether they still have family there or not. That's their root.

You can call them whatever you want, but they are still tied by their farmland, which is their major property. They are not freed to be a city dweller.

---

I stated finance as an example of high value add but unproductive. They are two different things or are you arguing for the sake of arguing. Or are you unaware of the implicit difference. That's the same premise for the call to people to study engineering rather than finance.

Your world is all about $ as guage but not everything is about econom$cs when we look at the real world. Like you like to say do "get real"

Please define your productivity and how to measure it. Everyone makes mistakes, but it does not reduce the value created by many other good things they have done. Finance, by far, is still one of the most productive industry in the world. My definition of productivity is economy value added.

Also, people study finance not because of the productivity, but the pay. That's totally different. And why not? Apparently, there is huge demand for financial profession, otherwise, the pay will go down enough that not a lot of people study it.

[specuvestor]

You are talking about Hukou. Moving into the city is urbanisation. We are not talking about hukou or nationality as in immigration. Those who moved into the cities are not farming... are they?

In any case with this massive urbanisation, the hukou system like the one-child policy, had served its purpose and should be phased off. It was a good system to prevent a massive influx into the cities and stress the infrastructure. Rumours is we are likely to hear about its changes in the CPC this month.

I am continuing this discussion as long as you cease to be demeaning not only to me, but to other forumers as well. I doubt there is a lack of people would would testify to that.

[If you just read headline news, yes, the urban/rural ratio is growing fast in China. The reality is not headline news.

People who are working in the cities does not belong to the city, not so different from the immigration workers in Singapore compared with local Singaporean. Or you are implying that they are the same?

Most of those workers are still not city dwellers though they have left rural areas. They still have right to the farmland in the rural areas. They are still treated differently in the city. They are still willing to go back as a farmer if farming gives them better living. Most of them go back to their home during Chinese New Year no matter whether they still have family there or not. That's their root.

You can call them whatever you want, but they are still tied by their farmland, which is their major property. They are not freed to be a city dweller.

Please define your productivity and how to measure it. Everyone makes mistakes, but it does not reduce the value created by many other good things they have done. Finance, by far, is still one of the most productive industry in the world. My definition of productivity is economy value added.

Also, people study finance not because of the productivity, but the pay. That's totally different. And why not? Apparently, there is huge demand for financial profession, otherwise, the pay will go down enough that not a lot of people study it.

Firstly EVA takes into account the cost of production. I don't know about you but in past 10 years I think the EVA is negative because we are still counting the cost.

Secondly nobody goes into a job for the productivity. That's what the boss wants not the worker. Like any bubbles, the pay for a hyped up hedge fund manager is ridiculous vs a S&P500 CEO. That much value added? It is arguable if a property agent is even worth 1% comm for a HDB transaction, there is no argument in this if we just use common sense. To paraphrase Buffett: I know fat when a fat man enters the room.

Thirdly productivity means producing something that can be consumed. We consume food, manufacturing, and yes even services like lawyers. But besides the traditional commercial banking, high finance is supposed to make asset allocation more efficient. Instead NOWADAYS it makes it more bizarre, which includes the introduction of frequency traders. That is why even capitalistic WB scoffs at them. Sober minds will know something is wrong with the system rather than chase the trail of money.

The difference is likely that you think a socialite is productive, while I think it is more parasitic.

[Greenrookie]

I always find the debate between specuvestor and freedom highly intelligent and thought provoking.

But freedom, to be honest, while I have no doubts about the content of your posts, the tone of it is really rather demeaning or rude at times. Well, I know u dun give a damn to what I think, if u give a damn to what other think, the tone would not be like this anyway. Nonetheless, do continue your posts, I am more interested in the content than the form or tones. Although specuvestor might not agree, your posts always result in even more in-dept rebuttals.

But if it can be done in a more harmonious way, even better!!

[CityFarmer]

Well, moderator is watching. The discussion has off-tracked and became personal attacks.

Those posts will be removed. Please re-focus on the topic.

Thanks

Regards
Moderator

---

But if it can be done in a more harmonious way, even better!!

I agree.