Chinese Government Trying to Put Brakes on Economy

The Chinese economy must be getting out of control, because the Chinese government is doing the unthinkable: It is desperately trying to put the brakes on the economy. When you pump a stimulus package that represents 14% of GDP through a fire hose into an economy, which was already on shaky bubble foundation, in a very short time you’ll have some serious unintended consequences — you’ll get super bubbles.

To understand what’s taking place in China today, we need to rewind the clock about a decade. At that time the Chinese government chose a policy of growth at any cost. To achieve that, it kept its currency (the renminbi) at artificially low levels against the dollar — this helped already cheap Chinese-made goods become even cheaper than its competitors’. The US and global consumers were eager to buy them. China turned into a significant exporter to the US. Normally, if free-market economic forces were at work, the renminbi would have appreciated and the US dollar would have declined. However, if China let its currency appreciate, its exports would have become more expensive and the demand for Chinese products would have declined, and its economy wouldn’t have grown at 10% a year.

But China isn’t your local democracy, and it needed to grow at any cost. So instead, through the government-controlled banking system, China accumulated a couple trillion dollars of foreign reserves in US dollars and euros. This had an unintended consequence: It helped keep US interest rates at very low levels, and lent a friendly hand in the financing of a huge consumption binge by the US consumer (i.e., China’s largest customer).

The more China sold to the US, the more dollars it accumulated, and thus the more US Treasuries it bought, driving our interest rates down. The US consumer was in turn happy to leverage its future (through the “always” appreciating asset, its home) and delighted to consume cheap Chinese-made goods.

This symbiotic match made in heaven between China and the US consumer worked great as long as housing prices kept rising and the financial machine kept multiplying dollars. But all good things come to an end, and great things come to an end with a bang. The financial meltdown erupted upon us and, well, you know how that story played out.

So now let’s fast-forward a year. Today the global economy is stabilizing. But the US consumers of Chinese-made goods are now deleveraging, unemployment is high, US banks aren’t lending.

Despite this, the Chinese export-based economy has clocked growth of 8.7% in 2009. The rest of the world looks at the Chinese growth miracle with envy; it seems that China has got economics figured out. But don’t hurry to trade your democracy for an authoritarian system. The Chinese grass is not as green as it appears.

First, one shouldn’t believe all the economic numbers that are put out by the Chinese government. This is the government that magically managed to report 6% to 8% GDP growth in the midst of the financial crisis, when its exports were down more than 25%, tonnage of goods shipped through its railroads was down by double digits, and its electricity consumption was falling like a rock.

Second, China will do anything to grow its economy, as the alternatives will lead to political unrest. A lot of peasants moved to the cities in search of higher-paying jobs during the go-go times. Because China lacks the social safety net of the developed world, unemployed people aren’t just inconvenienced by the loss of their jobs, they starve (this explains the high savings rate in China) and hungry people don’t complain, they riot. Once you look at what’s taking place in the Chinese economy through that lens, the decisions of its leaders start making sense, or at least become understandable.

Unlike Western democracies, where central banks can pump a lot of money into the financial system but can’t force banks to lend or consumers and corporations to spend, China can achieve both at lightning speed. The Chinese government controls the banks, thus it can make them lend, and it can force state-owned enterprises (one-third of the economy) to borrow and to spend. Also, China can spend infrastructure project money very fast — if a school is in the way of a road the government wants to build, it becomes a casualty for the greater good.

China has spent a tremendous amount of money on infrastructure over the last decade and there are definitely long-term benefits to having better highways, fast railroads, more hospitals, etc. But government is horrible at allocating large amounts of capital, especially at the speed it was done in China. Political decisions (driven by the goal of full employment) are often uneconomical, and corruption and cronyism result in projects that destroy value.

Infrastructure and real estate projects are where you get your biggest bang for the buck if your goal is to maintain employment, because they require a lot of unskilled labor; and this is where in the past a lot of Chinese money was spent. This also explains why the Chinese keep building skyscrapers even though the adjacent ones are still vacant.

Though Chinese economic growth in the past was very high, more recently the quality of growth has been low. For example, in an echo of past Chinese government asset-allocation decisions, China built the largest shopping mall in the world, the South China Mall, which is still 99% vacant years after construction. China also built a whole city, Ordos, in Inner Mongolia, on spec for one million residents who never appeared.

The inefficiencies are also evident in industrial overcapacity. According to Pivot Capital, Chinese excess capacity in cement is greater than the consumption of the US, Japan, and India combined. Also, Chinese idle production of steel is greater than the production capacity of Japan and South Korea combined. Similarly disturbing statistics are true for many other industrial commodities. The enormous stimulus amplified problems that already existed to financial-crisis levels. China is a less shiny but more drastic version of Dubai.

There is speculation that the Chinese consumer will pick up the demand slack for the US and European consumers who are deleveraging and buying fewer Chinese-made goods. This may happen, but it will take decades. The US and European consumers are two-thirds of much larger economies. The Chinese consumer is only one-third of the Chinese economy.

We look at China and are mesmerized by its 1.3 billion people, its achievements of the last decade, its recent economic resiliency, and its ability to achieve spectacular results on the fly. But we have to remember that economic bubbles are usually just a good thing taken too far. This was the case with railroads in the US in the late 19th century: The railroads were supposed to change the landscape of the US, and they did, but that didn’t prevent a lot of them from going out of business first. The Internet was supposed to change how we communicate, and it did, but in the process it generated a tremendous bubble, followed by the loss of wealth for many. The Chinese economy is no exception. Its long-term future may be bright, but in the short run we’ve got a bubble on our hands.

Everyone wants a shortcut to greatness, but there isn’t one. It would be great if the word (economic) cycle only existed in a singular form, and the only cycle we had in the economy was happy expansion. If there were no cycles, there would be no painful recessions. But as heaven couldn’t exist without hell, or capitalism without failure, economic expansion can’t exist without recession. China has been trying to bend the laws of economics for awhile, and with the control it exerts over its economy it may seem, at least for a short while, that the laws of economics work differently in China. But this is only a temporary mirage, which must be followed by huge pain and drastic consequences. No, there’s no shortcut to greatness – not in politics, not in personal life, and certainly not in economics.


Vitaliy N. Katsenelson
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

Vitaliy N. Katsenelson
Vitaliy N. Katsenelson, CFA, is a portfolio manager/director of research at Investment Management Associates in Denver, Colo. He is the author of Active Value Investing: Making Money in Range-Bound Markets (Wiley 2007).
Vitaliy N. Katsenelson

Latest posts by Vitaliy N. Katsenelson (see all)

Leave a Reply

10 Comments on "Chinese Government Trying to Put Brakes on Economy"

Notify of
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted

Great article!! I don’t believe the stats out of China either. There’s something sneaky going on in them there stats.

I’ve just returned from a business trip to China… visited Beijing, Nanchang, Shanghai. The new infrastructure is everywhere, vast freeways and seemingly endless new apartment complexes… all very impressive. On the outskirts of Beijing I noticed several very large apartment developments had been halted… by the state of the rusty steel reo rod obviously for some time. A local commented that the Government had introduced a VERY unpopular ban on the use of fireworks during the Lunar New Year/Spring Festival… this was quickly reversed because of widespread opposition. It would seem they are very concerned about sparking social unrest that… Read more »
Hey Vitaliy! You mean the USD should have declined on its largest trade weighted partner and the US should have had a “J” curve and exported it’s way back to prosperity. You stupid starts with an f. It is all about the capital Vitaliy. Heads I win tails you lose. The empire decides to chance it all on leverage, bottomless leverage, it is called Rubinomics. The moment the Yuan appreciates, the leverage buys the assets and sows the inflation and the leverage vanquishes the opposition. Hegemony it is called Vitaliy. Ask Vietnam about floating exchange rates. Come and kiss PJ… Read more »
I have been harsh. I don’t apologise for being so when the US’s yuan exchange rate narrative is one that externalises the US economic mirage built on bogus debt and that which plays to the US based “blamers” ready to unleash the dogs of war. China played in a field created by Americans, it has played the best game that it could, and it must keep playing the best game that it can. The sustainability, like the leverage abuse, still lies in American hands. From the above “Everyone wants a shortcut to greatness, but there isn’t one. It would be… Read more »

in the face of sceptics (and I dont know for sure), but global warming threatens the water supply (Himilayan ice melt) of most of Asia..who knows when?.
also noting that China has been fudging fish stock catches, whilst the fish stocks of the world’s oceans are decimated, giving an inflated state of environmental health. then again, they can do it tougher when it boils down to eating schrimp and insects.

great stuff too Ross , you could do a blog perhaps?… toned down and more explanatory for novices and sensitive folk.

Biker Pete

89peterg: “…when it boils down to eating schrimp and insects…”

Better fried, peterg. Don’t knock fried dragonflies until you’ve tried them.
And shrimps and scampi? Not quite your hairy marron; but hardly a tough way to survive economic hardship… !


better fried indeed when there’s no water and 12C hotter.

Biker Pete

peterg: “…better fried indeed when there’s no water and 12C hotter.”

Our creek used to flow eleven months of the year. Now we’re down to six. Water is going to be an issue, even down south. Loss of our forests will be the ‘canary-in-the-coalmine’, just as glacial melts may be in the northern hemisphere… .

12C hotter may indeed occur, but it’s more likely in our great-great-grand-children’s time. Maybe they’ll be darker-skinned… . :)


Excellent article Vitaliy, I really enjoyed it and appreciate all its points. Not sure when the Bubble will burst, but it will as they always do. The sheer size of China just delays the moment of the “pop!” I would argue, but, “pop” there will be.


biker peter, same here, water was 11 months, now 3 … lucky to find another source reliable (so far). 12C was an exaggeration, maybe , and would require a tipping point scenario. in any case, not long from now, it might be me growing asian vegies for the chinese market. who konws?

Letters will be edited for clarity, punctuation, spelling and length. Abusive or off-topic comments will not be posted. We will not post all comments.
If you would prefer to email the editor, you can do so by sending an email to