A Review of Joseph E. Stiglitz Article ‘China Century’ (Vanity Fair January 2015)

By

Sampson Iroabuchi M. Onwuka

A Review of Joseph E. Stiglitz Article ‘China Century’ (Vanity Fair January 2015)

Professor Joseph E. Stiglitz opens his essay in (Vanity Fair, Jan. 2015) with a laconic 18th Century English rondo, (1) “When the history of 2014 is written, it will take note of a large fact that has received little attention: 2014 was the last year in which the United States could claim to be the world’s largest economic power. China enters 2015 in the top position, where it will likely remain for a very long time, if not forever. In doing so, it returns to the position it held through most of human history.” China he said will likely remain in ‘top position’ ‘for a long time’, ‘if not forever.’ We suggest that this point is more of a punch line than a main focus, a hyperbole perhaps, but rendered in Economics is a combination too far. Looking at the basic outlines of his essay and how he roved from statistics showing that China has superseded USA in GDP, he moves into an argument about the politics of Washington, which based on our knowledge of his opposition to Washington Consensus may be suggesting that he was perhaps right. His essays are hints of justifying the rise of China, a case in point that can be taken on a face level in other to understand that Beijing Consensus.   

This forever may or may have started in 1999, but it will be too difficult to deny in 2014 that the last 15 years or the roaring 2000’s has not being a Chinese Decade. Since their inception into the World Trade Organization in 1999 and the coming of Europe as of a Formative Union or the ECB, China as an Old Giant has more than played a leading role in world markets. How well the forgotten Empire holds the belt is a question of strategy they plan to use in shifting from Communist economy to free and open market economy. As we should acknowledge by now, that all political institutions is a step towards free and open economy. It is perhaps exemplified by capitalist economy, but form all account of history, it is not exactly the same as free market, does not mean that open and regional based economy of the world is also a step towards this reality. The question that has occupied the minds of people is when will a new force capable of rivaling the United States will emerge? And what would the world be expecting from this power house? Never perhaps in the last 2o years would be said and argued that the force, buried for decades under the pile political militia was China of mainland Asia. The reality of their aspirations could in fact be said to have matured, for when the world woke to a China that surpassed the United States, it seem like a quite storm with greater marvel to perform with constant revisions of its exchange rate.

In 1999, nearly at the eve of the European Union (probably the greatest single economic mistake since Britain attempted after the First World War to return to the Pre-War Standard), an article by the US Secretary of Labor appeared of the Economist, where she argued against the role of government in directing the economic affairs of a Nation. According to her response to OECD titled ’Government Steering the Economy’, that two disadvantages of government intervention is that “one is that government is not omniscient despite all of those clever economists, it lacks the knowledge to steer and control the economy it pretends. The other is that, like any large organization, it is inflexible. Once a course has been set, it is hard to change.”

I cannot disagree with Stiglitz on his tutored analysis of the Chinese Century, which should be taken seriously in spite of its gaps and actual grappling with reality, head to tail with US, China has more people than the US, tail to head Chinese population ratio to US is three times the Americans if not four. Why do we parry a China who only lately after long and exhausted currency rotation and Government spending and world isolation now meets us at the market place with both hands full of it. It is not clear how to proceed on this matter, for if argument about clashing reaches a new level of political indication, we may let on but doesn’t seem like the chain of relation between new and old empires yielding to the new is suggestive that China is a new World Order. Among the top Banks which now occupy a healthy spot on the world biggest banks include (a) Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) with net 3, 181. 884, followed by (2) HSBC Holdings (UK) with net 2, 758.447 and then (3), China Construction Bank Corporation (China) with 2, 602.536 in trillion terms. Occupying (7) and (8) are Agricultural Bank of China worth 2, 470. 432 and Bank of China with net worth 2, 435.485…. The US banks that once dominated the markets including Bank of America came in 12^th with 2, 149.851 trillion dollars, J.P Morgan Chase and Co, (6^th) with 2, 496.900 net worth, and Citigroup Inc. (US) occupying (14^th) boosted their worth with a slight increase of 1, 894.376.00. It is remarkable that in less than a decade, Chinese Banks or even one China Bank is worth more than Barclays, let alone Royal Bank of Switzerland, or in this case, 4 Chinese Banks fairly and easily rank ahead of RBS. How could it all have happened? Perhaps the cultural age of China gave way to the Industrial reality and as they should from home front to global market, the world saw explosion of growth that they have never seen since the Muslims and their Islam turned the world – most of it – as their footstool.  

That analysis concerning how a new force emerges is macroeconomics and general to a fault. But then we may consider the transition strategy between Turkey and France and the reversals suffered by the French in Russia robbing them of that first place among the Eagles, we may see that the reasons for such action may have opened the way for Britain to militarily enhance their leadership position in the world. It was finally achieved through a final act and signature victory over the French, performed with fanfare at Waterloo. Since Waterloo or beginning at Waterloo, the rise of Britain – particularly England was well underway. We may not suggest that the shocks suffered by England and through English people in the WWI and WWII, prepared simultaneously the way for America. The greatness of America in terms of its cultural entity and industrial power began with local revolution, culminating in the Civil War. What we have learned from this age was applied in several forms and throughout the country with such septicity that 1900 would perhaps be called the final birth of the American might. Like China or should it like Russia, US was even among the most powerful nation by 1850, while they were not military tested saving for reactionary wars against Indians and the European interest and forces, Americans were feared for their productive ability since they manufactured nearly all the initial cheap materials at this period in the world, but later and with greater magic they yielded to the culture of perfection made most clearly with IBM machine a century later.

Now as then, the new forces of change beckons on the world and China emerges are a competent Champion and as Asia’s diorama lynch pin for economic progress, seem to have passed through much the same period of internal restructure and reproving to a period of rapid and nearly cheap alternative. This period like the most recent examples of Russia and United States, transition to a period of active and prolific production, changes somewhat and may be challenged by perfection and sensitive A class material which has enabled China transition from cheap alternative to equally with purpose be an alternative that allows China to revile the rest of the world. We have not forgotten what China went through and either should China forget that their expectation of justifying the years in isolation is solely and automatically reverting to this first class position. They are manufacturing first class student at Harvard and University of interest in the world. Shanghai is still number leading mathematics PICA/PACA rated in the world. There are fewer countries in the world with as many Chinese engineers are there are workers. But this is not only a case for their first class position; their human capital alone is better used elsewhere.


Let’s face it that out knowledge of manufacturing from production is serious, our knowledge of industries and growth of industries in is quite demanding in Economics, that a separation between these two requires the experts in the discipline to explain or some kind of an end point of its final products to explain. This end point in employment which production and not manufacturing is primary. It leads us to consider the role of unemployment in normalizing inflation which is here shifted or exported to foreign market through compulsory return of workers once considered unemployed or under-employed. It seems easy and perhaps easier to suggest that the use of Chinese 10% compulsory unemployment towards distributive practice () of continued employment as a trick to constantly recycle free from meeting an equilibrium and then a stagnation like the one suffered in Russia through 60’s and 70 and are perhaps approaching the same thing, China achieves this gap with an 8-10% compulsory unemployment mitigating equilibrium in local market -  whereas I on my independent account believe equilibrium is really not possible perhaps in free market conditions – for with China and an economy dogged by price control and a central planning committee, this equilibrium is ideally possible, possible as with the use of dummy variable and advanced mathematic computation in economics.

To have an economy for instance where everybody is working with intent at achieving direct and equal balance of trade – a communist market illusion, more political than economic -, working with the total intent at micro-netting an estimated gross from a final product, is an economy that will fully satisfy its demand local demand bracket, has no need for others and only itself, such a poison to itself even like a Russia where demand and supply within demand supply, such a market with its predetermined legal tender and without effective foreign export market should not be trusted. Such a market if be Russia, China, or any BRICS with little opulence to world market in spite of the excesses of FDI leads from permanent money dozing and dousing on its Russian and China numbers to a new market totally different. Russia was a strong market afraid of something, exposure given the levitating energy it would seem to be drawing or have drawn from other places of the world.  Such a market may also suffer from a second problem, the problem that China is concealing and should allow to face, is the ‘natural treatment’ of free market through competition and alternate choices arises, where the local formative energies of a balance of budget arises, balance of trade triumphs, trade commission that will protect free market emerges, individual and private disequilibrium which only the choice function even for public utility can assure.

Why production is important in the survival of a nation it is the ability of the Government to create employment or labor through its allocation procedure that makes the difference and remains for Communist economy a tool for determining the growth of the economy. But the underlining fact of production is that it can used by the government and its influenced labor complex, it is dependent on the direct activity of the Government, like the primary levels of Philips Curve and NAIRU (a name mathematical fundamental to quantity of money and real term employment, can serve as a legal tender and replace the Nigerian Naira. There are several things that can go right and wrong with a first level of unemployment numbers but attaching NAIRU to money and to legal tender measures its relative conscious expenditure to availability and total quantity) which suffers an increasing quantity when a barrier is reached, shift from labor and production to full employment and expenditure the propensity to spend or save, ends up creating inflation. It is the second stage of NAIRU that governs the correlation between inflation and price, where inflation becomes equal to price.

Productive frontiers are one the major economic drive-ins in the world. When there are cases of depression economy or recession, any country in crisis usually turn to expansion especially in the form well known today as monetary expansion for aggregate demands. These are items associated with production capacity which encourages employment and from the appreciation in employment, there is a long term change in the behavior of fixed income earners (Friedman), and the tendency to spend usually gravitate towards inflation. To show that this form of economic practice is not confined to Capitalist economy as a way of explaining its purpose in Communist China, we begin by reminding ourselves that price and manufacturing go hand and globe, that in terms of inflation which is usually self-generated but not ultimately endogenous, it is common sense to place the arguments of Hyman Minsky concerning the role of central bank in creating this inflationary pressures. In other words, between production and manufacturing is a cadre of interest rate lending, that feeders the cost of final products which in spite of the variance of market action and activity, tend to move upwards than downwards. This particular niche in the market (not niche market) is a careful analytical procedure that means that a certain form of production should be avoided to micro-manage the issue of excess returns of profit, though necessary for growth in the economy, may also be instrumental to its failure over time. Once more, we look at the argument made by Milton Friedman that long term wages do not always correlate profit.

As such in the arguments of Minsky, there should be a way of offloading the inflation which are sometimes unavoidable, by looking at the external market and balance of trade or trade deficit. Largely, the problem of ‘Unstable Economy’ is due to what he called ‘slave’ attitude of the Federal Reserve System in dealing and putting with actions of the Banks, whereas the interest rates set aside by the Banks do not always account for overall national GDP. Why his arguments are plausible and to some extent accurate, it reflects the actions of the Communist party and neo-Communist China in excessing production pro economy, which does with issue of quantity of money – nearly akin to a Mises economy and the Austrian School that accept that Savings was essentially part of the investment and account for their overall GDP, but by having a kind of central body which helps the growth of the market it sets itself to close to central planning body, a communist body similar to Socialist but ethereally different from Socialism. We there suggest that having a set a premium for the price of production of goods is not without the future market for exporting to other demand and supply outside say a China, the rest of the would be revert to this productive curve of the Communist or central planned economy that the profit or growth of these economy aside the human capital is a set of mathematically determined equations and price theory that nets a predetermined profit without the inflation which accompanies the function of any market. A Made in China proto-type is usually set to offset a competition, but what it is really doing is shift inflation from China or Communist economy to the rest of the world. As such, we may make due with commitment showered on this process by how much money is perhaps flowing from different parts of the world to China and Chinese Banks. In the 70’s there was hardly any such resources, in the 80’s when Americans and the British took advantage of the uncertainty in China market to channel their resources, China experienced a major bulge in the Banking and finances, with some of the investors thinking perhaps of asset bubbles and a penetration of the yet to be discovered market. What was known and perhaps taken for granted was the cultural severity of China and its disciplined commitment of being the first economy which is 15-25 years from now - given the current facts. We cannot only make insinuations about Minsky as a man advising a proto-type that it practiced in Unionized economy and in China today, but his fault, according some of the assumptions in the quantity money theory, is that production hubs are different from each other, correlating a country’s export potential to say a US usually allows it to earn more, but getting from the value which this US of A can bring to a bifurcated nation, usually takes a different length of time. One of the more demanding changes that can take in the economy is the transition from production hub to economy powerhouse, which begins with enlarging the A game of this host nations, especially through allowing the free market determine the value of the currency and the strength of the economy, something A China may have to do if in entertains any hopes of being among the eagles. Here, China as a consumptive economy is delayed by the exchange rate, determined in part by the IOU greenbacks re-entering the US through the Hong Kong market, determined in part by the expense driven expansion of the central planning committee and above all by allowing the Global economy determine its actual value misplaced perhaps under the current climate of the condition.

 Money system or the History of Monetary Policy considered a ‘black box’ of Economic theory by Samuelson and was praised by many experts for empirical resource and use of statistics. Its premised argument differ on the levels of the expert, but looking it from books also written Milton Friedman and Anan Schwartz, you escape the book with some basic understanding that price and bond markets divide on the role of the Federal Government, that a general theme on Riemann Integral, as X approaches Y and distracts from X, each capable of leading each other but not exactly meaning. In between the Bond/Price integral is the quantity of money and role of Government, which as some argue may stating really do not matter as long moral obligations is not betrayed. How this happens and when it happens is the basic themes about destabilizing power of the Federal spending and actions of the Banks.

Most countries in the world cannot exercise this option in economic theory largely for the role of inflation (the DNA of Economics) which comes with any version of full employment whereas wages and prices are argued by communist and central governing authorities to be negligible if ratio/rations parallel the needs of a system dynamic. However long and visceral the description of work- based rational of money is concerned, that is final product by Karl Marx is a kind of money, mitigated on by Irving Fisher who called it interest rate, it does appear that price which is inflation belong entirely with open market and consumer economies of the world, real economies which is constituted by both active inflation and interest rate, production on one side and manufacturing on the hand, the latter a product of a market; consumer economy, which China and Russia is not . 

It looks like the primary problems of a communist economy is inflation, which they can avoid through a propensity to equilibrium by constantly recycling the propensity through compulsory unemployment, at least I have argued, an 8-10 percent of the total balance sheet.  But in terms of price determined by market, the role of manufacturing is far more paramount then the role of production. It does not mean that these two forces exist in isolation given the surplus theory where a primary concern of a capitalist economy is the need to balance budget and close the gaps on trade deficit. Consumer economy is based on existing market function and through price, which differentiate from employment consumer economy. Inflation from manufacturing by chasing a different market….

Arguable, the Chinese currency is still satellite for the United States for practical reasons that it is not yet an independent economy, and like Euro that chose to be a satellite to US than compete as a sun which the French, German, and to some degree Italians were before the EU, China pegging its worth to US re-plays son and father relationship, where America is the father or mother here or at least a laity uncle. By age, and in the years that China played the ‘signifying monkey’ to the rest Asia and then the world, China is higher pecking order, but there was no such United States in those days, as such the role that America enjoins today is the role that is not new in Asia and through Asia; China like previous empire has been there and more than twice. It still leaves with the lessons of the past or the past makes for us; the path is the language of ‘Consumer economy’ for no magic exist for the rise of US than the consideration of a new market order from production to dictating the market to deregulation and setting their own standards, and an economy that as much part of its ability to produce as it is a market economy determined by price and manufacturing. Evidently speaking, it is only America that can regard itself as a Super Economy, that part of the reason why this needs to be said is that it comforts the rest of world that there is assurance with confidence in current global market, both of the words ‘assurance’ and ‘confidence’ look alike, may also sound alike, but compared much closely and from original intent of the author, some assurance in practice if not markets is all driving by meeting a baiting standards and surpassing, speaks to what happens when there is market estimate at say an NYSE and the traders preach on one thing and by the end of year actually achieve it.

Confidence is a question of history from tried and tested experience, for instance what is the confidence Chinese numbers are accurate and true? The only response to this practice of confidence is that Chinese are sometimes full of their characters, yet there are more than one too many instances that their numbers came from elsewhere. In real life, anyone can lie to avoid social conditional of some sort, but nearly no body that it matters in world market is a zero-sum game since anybody make up their corrective measures on what really sells and how their profits are derived including Newman and Simons sacrificing effects, only in my view necessary when the standards are the same for all cases of economic respect.        

It is not the role of the Government to decide the economic future of any society that Government may intervene but the problem is that when mistakes occur in the course of running any country and in the decision making process, there is a long bias associated with it. For all trades which the rest of world has more than indulged since the Brent Wood, the impact of organizations such as the OECD (Organization for Economic Corporation and Development), EEPA (Employment and ECONOMIC Policy Administration), NAFTA (North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement), GATT (The General Assembly on Trade and Tariff) – which comparable to NAFTA, ECM (European Common Market), NAB (National Association of Business), and older organizations such as IMF (Internal Monetary Funds)and (WTO) World Trade Organization and to some extent ECOWAS, has mainly forwarded world market in one direction, has delineated the scalability of the functional markets, and has more than awarded interested parties with the unfair trans-border advantage.  These organization which emphasis bilateral agreement between governments take on added meaning when the comparative advantage of Supply end economy is set a function of its demands.  There is a second theme here on Bretton Woods since the outfit that compose the house on which IMF is built is this Bretton Wood. It looks like IMF (International Monetary Funds) also inherited all the proposals on building economic theorem, comingled by recent Robert Mundel and Harry Johnson about a transitioning from a dictator economy or centralized economy not unlike the Communist economy with all brightness for future years, downcast on state and national monopoly and enterprises, shift from these government control to private control; the privatization scheme, to decentralizing the economy, leading to the opening up of the local market to all the agents of free markets and market systems. The last stage is the more insufferable and may be advised against the burgeoning strength of a new China that as much the world need new consumer economies and that China should de-regulate some of its rules, it may not attempt this overnight. The transition into a real economy is necessary for China mounting this mantle. It is not clear how the world would still take China, yet my advice to their pack of wealth and money masters and mistresses, whose jobs has superseded individual expectations and wealth accumulation is looking at the what happens when you target of an 8-10% growth is served by a recycle of the 10% re-employed, yet in constant mark to market  demarcation between the an exchange rate such a US dollar to Chinese RMB, of even 1; 13 from beginning reaching to what is today, shows that the profit margins do not truly reflect the mathematical equivalence of estimable 10% growth, meaning that China is extensively overproduced, a condition that will become available if and when it shifts from current exchange rate to something less steep to US. There are ways to encourage a healthy redactor to Chinese 2000’s, a redox from recycling is one, placing enough emphasis on energy is important especially the deals with Russia’s gas and petroleum, but neglecting the spurious advise of a Buffet to move the exchange rate upwards or keep it as is for a reasonable period, it’s enough to encourage a new definition of economic and capitalist depended market. 

These kind of economic environment has never in its history produced any fair or respectable business lead it has manufactured casualties by creating standards that are only within the grasps of multinational corporations. This in-turn flood Open Market Systems such as the U.S (technically the only real market) with Hot Money, Human trafficking (Natashas), drugs, bugs, persons of Interest, and merchants of death.  The border between Mexico and the United States during the NAFTA accords is a well-studied and cited example, the extent to which human beings will be willing to go to partake in greener pastures, all of which is not said to reflect the velocity of currency between an always struggling Mexican Economy within the Shadow of U.S market. The example is removed from the formal economic problems facing Mexico, that the advantage of playing Satellite to super state is from the beginning an error. The rest of world from Europe – especially Eastern Europe whose depth of poverty is only recently public – to Asia; both the big elephants of India and China, to all extent Japan and the other Tigers, are resolving the fate of their currency around with Interest pegged to the United States dollars, jettisoning on the local adjustments fitting for International Markets, and hoping through the bifurcating to keep the productive tag to consumption a case of U.S versus the world.

When he mentions that it is not without reasons…

(2) “The world economy is not a zero-sum game, where China’s growth must necessarily come at the expense of ours. In fact, its growth is complementary to ours. If it grows faster, it will buy more of our goods, and we will prosper. There has always, to be sure, been a little hype in such claims—just ask workers who have lost their manufacturing jobs to China. But that reality has as much to do with our own economic policies at home as it does with the rise of some other country.”

(3) “Second, if we ponder the rise of China and then take actions based on the idea that the world economy is indeed a zero-sum game—and that we therefore need to boost our share and reduce China’s—we will erode our soft power even further. This would be exactly the wrong kind of wake-up call….

This is total opposition to Washington Consensus.

Stiglitz, (4) “A new global political and economic order is emerging, the result of new economic realities. We cannot change these economic realities. But if we respond to them in the wrong way, we risk a backlash that will result in either a dysfunctional global system or a global order that is distinctly not what we would have wanted.”

These economies which defy all the ‘principles of economies’ will not exactly function at least with a view at profit without the background of a trading business partner from a consumer based market economy. Social economy exist to some advantage by its pairing with other economies of the world, does not mean that only form market considered optimum for common market economy is capitalist, it makes a separate case that there is working progress in terms of all markets and all system dynamics, that they are primarily concerned in providing as much access as possible to the market place, that markets pursue this destiny as a matter of consequence. The argument is meaningful if we add that the role of economist is to explore the limits of profits and price advantage that accompanies a change in business dynamics from one form to another, of for disequilibrium or company and individual a based transition, it is estimate of the total profit from total amount of investment when new products are manufactured from old. The fall of Berlin Walls and the inception of East European countries in the world market unveiled the depth of losses associated with an economic Iron Curtain.

For all the intent of argument, it leads to several view point and considering the fall of Russia as a complex of its economic Paradox, such an economy, projects outward strength – it is government controlled – it bleeds from poor domestic restructure, anemic of its recipe. The issue of intrinsic value being the value placed on price over product tend to suggest that returns are more powerful than investment which cannot be said to be any different from investment preferred over returns, both lateral approach useful when we playoff long-term goals against short-term goals, or Government macro-based economic indexing from dues ridden to changes in private operational markets; bond as affected by bank stocks.

The failures of Communist economies to close ‘Vega’ adjusted gaps between the Stock and Bonds as driven by the market direction and procured by the leadership factor of the first and future market, is not without doubt the reasons for the general collapse achieved in the first place that brought down the Communist Russia in the 1990’s, a generation that was not prepared for the pressures were unleashed to the challenges of a New Standards. 

“Since investment is the backbone of productivity, the productivity gain in the United States is much smaller than in Germany and Japan.” “Huge federal deficits and debt kept the interest rates higher in the United States than in Germany and Japan. As a result, American companies were at a disadvantage in borrowing for investment vis-à-vis their competitors.” (1) Manufacturing (2) construction (3) retail….

Russia then and now has little operational room for growth. It was never a leader economy; it was a reactionary economy entirely dependent on a structure that existed with or without purpose in Europe and in US and it was accustomed to its own devices it led nowhere but downwards like old company without external challenges. If Eastern Europe from the ink of Bernanke’s student support that prices at a pre-arranged showing is allowed to reproduce its own curve in the open market, the host market lack the stress and strain to adjust to the external pressures or open competition. The movement of Government owned companies to privatization as scheme perpetuated by the IMF running against the challenges of Europe in post Marshall Plan of the 50’s, there are hints that the involvement of these strategies now injured with the region single market could benefit some of these former European economies.

The debt gaps from Eastern European gives and in out on why the issue of domestic strength raised by Porter may not easily be achieved without Government policy and Government control, may not be achieved without tampering from external market but nowhere confined to Government consensus such as Washington’s, and not entirely opposed to Beijing Consensus who cannot occupy the leadership position of world markets given the level of their overall transition to capitalism; money for money sake, profit determined by the markets or exchange of goods or price as function of the markets. Inflation and inflationary pressure accompany heavy Foreign Direct Investment, the total amount of foreign currencies entering a new capitalizing market usually break the back of small and pedestal local rate of return, it manufactures reasons why there the bigger and more powerful economy leaning on the boundary or trans-border economy achieves new challenges and with the Shadow banking ever present with special privileges, there is a shift to Real Estate buttressed by the inflation adjusted Government Bond. Banks empower a healthy bicameral.      

 (5) “Consider the so-called Trans-Pacific Partnership, a proposed free-trade agreement among the U.S., Japan, and several other Asian countries—which excludes China altogether. It is seen by many as a way to tighten the links between the U.S. and certain Asian countries, at the expense of links with China. There is a vast and dynamic Asia supply chain, with goods moving around the region during different stages of production; the Trans-Pacific Partnership looks like an attempt to cut China out of this supply chain.” But this not the case, nowhere confined to the case and to a large extent….

The Moratorium for International financing initiated by Henry Kramer of Stein school of Business, which told from the pages of Obama Banks and the financial regulations from 2008 financial collapse, is angst against the shadow financial practice of leading investors to end of economic investment, with investment from Internal Specie Banks such as IMF and the World Bank which are directly owned as if private owned by multinational bank corporation. American Banks until lately were not reasons too clear stipulated by the New Deal on the 30’ and of 42’s, would authorize American Banks to participate in International lending without penetration of these U.S banks. Although these banks evaded these Seagull Act, some of their actions were public reasons for world be investors to take canvass on the landscape of American Business practices. What was common to Japan, to Europe following the formative IMF was permissible in the Americans. But until lately, these practices have remained the corner stone of many economic nations, especially in the aftermath of Bretton Woods.

Stiglitz (6) “Yet another example: when China, together with France and other countries—supported by an International Commission of Experts appointed by the president of the U.N., which I chaired—suggested that we finish the work that Keynes had started at Bretton Woods, by creating an international reserve currency, the U.S. blocked the effort.” 

Glass and Steagull is one the reasons why the Bretton Wood accords did not go far enough into US, especially the role America played in rebuilding Europe after WWII. The Marshall Plans for Europe which was partial equilibrium or what Kenneth Galbraith under John F. Kennedy would consider ‘special interest’ zones, essentially a page from Harvard School of Economic than Chicago, regarding a late and reversed version of Pareto optima. A special interest zone was effectively used by Deng Xiaoping following the analysis of the Russian Communist Collapse and the advice from his mainly Harvard trained economists, both from Asia and from United States. Of course, the short story is that Communist China emphasized Shenzhen region and Shanghai as a way to defray the problems of purpose in the central planning committee. But many of the problems associated with Special Interest zones is that they are usually the central focus of the economic empowerment and development, hence they receive the highest attention, betraying the CPI equilibrium format and  of course the problem of panic when a tipping point is reached.  To have an international basket at this point may be difficult to maintain since the forces at work are driven by International Standards. China without marking distinctions does not respect any Bretton Woods accord, or would have respected it.

If we compare China from its earliest days as an experimenter in Communism, it looks to suggest that they and Russia were part of the principle reasons why International basket failed. To iron out an International currency basket we need all the participating economic communities to account for their products and their currency. We need them to work with specific International Standard to effectively insure free market play in the overall market of the World. Communism didn’t respect this financial consciousness, could not have, hence, the impact of China in breaking World Standards and Markets should not be awarded. China hedged their local expansion and transition through inflation, relied heavily on supply chains with entrenched monopoly creating a false progress by failing to expand elsewhere, are seeking to penetrate the markets around the world, and through Industrial Unions, are hoping to tag the Renminbi to Greenbacks via Taiwan. All Asian miracles suffer the same sickness as if the ‘ends’ no longer justifies the ‘means’, that the adjustments to supply economics which is left to Government is in effect a poaching of International markets. From U.S historical rear-view, we may compare the historical atlas of the Depression Age and the problems that U.S was by circumstances of the era forced to deal it. The problems of NRA and the efforts created by the organization towards standardizing the business codes which replaced the parity of the goodwill Government spending, is to a large extent no different from Government sponsored projects in many parts of Asia markets.

In some sense, China is some experiment largely for the precautions against toeing the lines of Japanese miracle, which placed enormous and almost singular faith on U.S market. The China miracle is not without the advantage that US market offers, for sure, China has avoided the holes in the evolution of Japan as a market world power. The only difference between Japan’s productive measures which superseded the 70’s and the 80’s and Japan as a world class economic hub, the shortfall in Japan’s future market expectations from the 1990’s, till the moment that it is no longer the brighter Asian technological spot or Japan taken that seriously given its interest rated force implied to the rest of world, as its shift from local manufacturing to financing, from production and employment where a natural level of unemployment occurs, to production in the context of X, Y, Z, where exports from Japan approaching equilibrium forces it to take in products from other parts of the world. Japan is still straddling between a production hubs to manufacturing hub, the latter is limited to inflationary considerations of parallel markets with US and its bifurcation directly amount of products hitting the Americans or the Europe.  

In my estimate and a historian of higher latitude than Keynes, I could point that over-emphasize in any one key area of total consumption economy is perhaps a leading reason for its decline and fall. Inflation may be a DNA for the studies in Economies, but the sugar complexes for inflation is not really supply of money as per Friedman and Fisher, it is placing too much emphasis on a system dynamic within the CPI, that is generating more attention than necessary. In the words of Stiglltz, he added that    

(8)“And a final example: the U.S. has sought to deter China’s efforts to channel more assistance to developing countries through newly created multilateral institutions in which China would have a large, perhaps dominant role.”

These citation is affirmative of the Professor Stiglitz’s opposition to Washington Consensus, which places an executive summary of his argument somewhere between International basket and Global market as the basis on economic transformation of any country, which also lend some idea to where he stands with China away from well stated demarcation between the Capitalism and Communism. In this case, the markets have long replaced their overall productive interest and the question is how these groups achieve their final visions in the world. Perhaps the man opposition to Washington Consensus is a form re-view of what Washington should be doing, perhaps Washington Consensus was very different from Monroe Doctrine, perhaps it was not respected in Washington or elsewhere.

In a sense, there are material reasons why U.S has inveighed against the financial subduction, it is in the interest of the least dispassionate observer to take in the gaps in undue financial practices, a point which a certain Paul Weyrich in his call for Moral Majority, his Political Council and the Heritage Foundation will raise towards the Transparency of some of the Banks practices, especially Banks which unlike U.S, are government owned.

The Heritage Foundation and the older organization such the Council for Foreign Relations may have prodded the famous argument made by John Williamson in 1989 termed as a Washington Consensus which (1) ‘imposed fiscal discipline’ (2) ‘reform taxation’ (3) ‘liberalize interest rates’ (4) spending on health and education (5) security property rights (6) privatize State-run subsidies  (itself the corner stone of all the doctrines since it torches on the SAP; Structural Adjustment Programs, popular in many third world) (7) ‘deregulation of the market’ (another issue of dissent between the SEA; ‘South East Asia’ and West) (8) ‘adapting to the competitive exchange rate’ or more to so, permitting world markets to determine the price of local currency (9) ‘remove barriers to trade’ (10) and remove barriers to Foreign Direct Investment. These doctrines are not new but seem to reflect the barring limits of a State Sponsored economy whose true value cannot be called a ‘function of the market’ and therefore represents a false growth and economy and in 2014 at least, it can be argued as a crash of the free markets system with much world essentially parasite to these West Economies particularly United States.    

The excuse for comments of this nature is set to appeal to the economic school of discipline that opposes government intervention, and the foremost institution called the Chicago School did not mean to deter the government from participating in the affairs of the any economy, rather it forbids the general tendency of the government towards control of its market through spending. This where China is, especially in the new accounting standards available and mainly used in China, or what they call Chinese numbers and not characters. A Chinese number is temporary market condition and formatting, that is mainly used and accounted for by Chinese and for Chinese, including the spurious problems of digital money, that is money paid directly into State Owned Bank accounts to individual names and merit. But who doesn’t like the Chinese, a permanent cog in the furniture of human beings. If we toe the arguments of Stiglitz here, we can see that he may or may not have lived in China for any long spells of active time, does not mean he has not lived in Asia especially Japan. Both the Chinese and Japanese are nothing compared to Indians, the latter is slow very Indian but a lesser patriot than Chinese and Japanese, the former lazier. They hardly work in China it is something you learn gradually but there is action beyond your comparable imagination. Compared to the Chinese we find in downtown New York the difference is night and day, and most of the Chinese that suffer themselves to hit the Americans are usually those not politically or militarily connected. In proper light, the comingled themes of China as a world power in market is reasonable, but as an economic world power is in my view and from experience not exactly accurate. The poverty rate in China is a third world category, believe in this story that there are more Chinese people starving than are Africans, but of course people starve in India or Asia generally than they do in Africa. This does not mean that the people are not productive, does not mean that the production frontier is not in their favor especially when there are cases of production to be made about China than manufacturing indexing and its price theory which put them in spite of the new numbers put China above the United States.

We seem to connect some of the assumptions about the conversion rate of 5 Chinese Renmibi to US dollar is a drive-in for the sudden surge in market value in China. Why the road in business than leads from exchange rate to the damage house of business in a third world, always leads from a damage house to prosperity through exchange rate. The only difference is the production curve of the economy or the production frontier on the country at the receiving of the exchange rate prairie. China magnifies its agenda from the visions it has for the new world and for over a century, this faith is not misplaced given the position of the new numbers. With more of the Chines currency approaching a 4 ratio convertible barrier, they may have removed themselves from the problems of moderation to a new reality of being the most productive economy in 2014, usually a telling sign of a quick and silent revolution that may lead in a decade or a quarter of century from here-on to economic powerhouse.

There are lots to be admired about the productive power and disciplined process which is their chief secret, but the cultural revolution that gave birth to this new China is a revolution that more than adequate share of administration of process and government that will take at least 25 years to end. Being a production hob does not mean an economic power house, (1) most countries in the world do not trade with the Yuan, a possible that could change anytime (2), Single currency as not measured as part of total export market, is some of the reasons why there are problems of grasping between what a production house and hob such as China is, that it dependent on returns on prices in entirely differently economic environment hence a matter of manufacturing, is a pacesetter for economic exchange via a new money order which the Yuan will introduce.

Nothing best a country’s unified ability that the Production Frontier that allows it to play a bigger role in its estimate of global view, nothing in the world of business that divides and conquers a people that the new demands of market free from external oddities of everyday super power presence. Unlike the 80’s and the quarrels over a Washington D.C and its America that has done more than many of its past empires to spread development around. The damages done to Africa did not begin with America or did it end it until Obama. Sudan for instance was a waste basket on murdering stampede, where immigrants with Islamic devoted background were chanting that God gave them Africa, re-entered Sudan or South of Egypt and has exercised murderous ramparts in what is still Darfur. Washington D.C played a lip service to this development in Darfur, like Britain which ruined a lot of African countries over Crude oil, placed Gadhafi in power over the natives who ruled Libya and controlled with interest much of the Crude oil from Libya until President Obama was elected. In Egypt, the story is not that different, Mubarak remained in power longer than necessary and only attrition was asked to leave office especially when President Obama denied him the support asking him to make his transitioning. In Congo, there was said to have been a civil war between some expatriates and the Congo military which lasted for decades, the first light of settling the problem came through an ex-Nigerian President Obasanjo, but the whole division remained in place until Obama whose lack of support for the expatriates discouraged further assault on the natives.  But at the buck and sheen on the process of conflict in Congo is the whole sale pricing of Congo’s most priced assets.

Millions of lives where crucified in the names of military expedition with world breathing terror on the neck of even neighboring African States such as Mozambique, Tanzania, Botswana, and Rwanda; where at the instigation of two French expatriates – perhaps robbed of some of their treasured resources or forced out of it by military, took down a presidential jet that led two tribes suspecting each other into long and bloody massacre in 1994. Over 1 million of these people died in fewer than 2 days. Somalia for many years remained the clutter and enemy state said to be opposed to United States, and in Angola there was disquiet in almost every political era beginning with Crude oil discovery, the UNITA Rebel forces in Uganda were a problem in Africa until the election of Barack Obama. Almost a year in office all these headaches came to a grinding ends. These circumstances of politics and political is not a summary of the defective prowess of Washington Consensus, but it mirrors the debt between an overall position of a state and their reactionary tendencies to the rest of world, from the individual issues between US and places such as Venezuela, Cuba, and Mexica to an extent, that these areas were considered problem areas and the US Government made their cases for and against these South American States, that eventually decision to oppose the United States lived a short death with Barack Obama.

Since his office, these United States has not quarreled with these neighbors and some of the cracks in the relationship with middle east has long been repaired, saving the problem with Palestinian and Israel and the Syria as a bottom fork of Russia presence in that part of world. It was the British that instituted the current Syrian house, the British that helped to stabilize the house of Saud who took their mantle of leadership from the natives who many would believe live in these areas. Here’s the point, at no point in the history of America has American been any richer in their possessions than now, at no point in the history of the Americans have enjoyed the size of influence we have now where America is the only Super State for nearly two decades. At no point in the history of America that the current Economic rewards any bigger and better than what we have. At no point have we seen American Banks and Insurance companies commonly operate in several parts of the world than these decades past.

No country could say that it was directly responsible for saving Europe, one, twice and more than three times, forgiven debt and resources from Marshall Plans to the very recent debt cancellation of American monetary exposure to Europe. Over a trillion in 2012 was written off from mark to market American financial credit market. US single handedly delivered Greeks from their debts, lavishing over 2 trillion dollars when all parts of the non-performing EU markets such as Portugal and Spain were also pardoned of their Debt. In fact, the buckle of world relationship was so much that the country has to borrow more and for the first time, extended and now recovered from a promise they have maid. In latterly days of Lehman Saga which the Professor hinted on, there was no a billions every day – A Billion Dollar worth of Securities – leaving the US to China every day through the OTC. It does appear the interesting position of the Washington Consensus which though opposed by Professor Stigltz is depended on those in power and the merit of the executive psychology.

For no case would separate Washington D.C from what is Beijing Consensus that the problems of DARFUR, which then and now divides and bridges Sudan, for here, in one area, the Chinese and the zootomic India fresh from buying away parts of Tanzania with world’s greatest land real estate where no longer content on dictating to Tanzania – An African Country – were now interested with China in removing the natives from Oil Rich areas of Sudan in other to migrate small sources of energy back to China of Yesterday. George Clooney had some clue on what happened in DARFUR but the debt of the problems and why American needed a new leader summarized America from a different era. We take this theory of Consensus with new beginning as If from the old, that the theory of China being more moderate in several parts of the World is perhaps not correct, they are and some historians of the Vietnam will tell partly driven by their ideologies but largely newer from views that are no longer at ease with China today, yet stuffed with the past is a new reality which they have not acknowledged. That new reality is arriving, since now they lead the world as the most productive economy, 

The Washington Consensus which is now under fire, perhaps from Professor Joseph E. Stieglitz  

If we choose to compare the privileged authors of this period for instance Naill Ferguson and his ‘Ascent of Money’ is no doubt a theme from Alan Metz ‘History of the Federal Reserve’, where in the very last pages he struggled to mention that the Ascent of Money was a reflection of phases of Capitalist economy with its setbacks and triumphs.  Books on the ‘Olive and the Lexus’ by Friedman were not doubt coveted from a similar book treating the same topic but unlike Andrew Sorkin’s ‘Too Big to Fail’ which feathered Paul Volckers’ ‘Too Big to Fail’, the elaborate conception of a state sponsored Bank and the idea that some banks were too big to fail is not a principle that is compatible with US in the 70’s with rich oil success or the triumph of the big corporation in Third World economies where in the names of Foreign Direct Investment, countries such as Venezuela, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Nigeria were overtaken by  Shell Corporation with the indirect backing of IMF.  The final product of Bank or creation of Banks too big to fail place several head shots on IMF, making it difficult for Bretton Wood to last – that is assuming we have a relevance to the new ideologies of China.

It is here that Joseph Stieglitz opposition to Washington Consensus is essentially elaborate for his argument these financial institution acting in the names of Structural Adjustment programs or International association such as the GATT – mainly associated with Japan – paper out these third world economies who in the names of Progress privatize their Third tier market to the detriment of both the local economies and the Foreign Investors that are sometimes deliberately over-weighted on struggling markets. It is natural course of world market to experience periods of losses and profits, and it is an old theory that for every concave in the graph of any a dynamic system, there is perhaps a convex someplace else. 

II

Considering the wealth of history available to the better ends of Europe at the close of the 19^th century, where Prussia succeeded in defeating France in 1870 and the persecution that followed including the direct injury to the subdued minority in Prussia and eventually Germany, it is not surprising that German at the beginning of th20th century produced the difficult economic theories of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, and the varying schools of economics in names of Austrian School, all of which carefully emerged as a cultural reaction to the problems of Government intervention, to a degree that the salutation of Communism by Marx prophetic premise of the future of workers uniting with no prospects of losses than their ‘chains’ does not betray the impact of Patronage economy and receiving peonage, on no other count but those of profit to one group and losses of another. It will be in Russia and in some sever parts of dilapidated Turkish realm that the reversals on what considered Capitalism would take its roots and from these angels it is not wrong to suggest that the role of Government in deciding the economic fate of any nation is…not.

But this theory about the losses and gains and the trade through a recycle of unemployment and inflation is probably not true. What means the conceptions of Marx on Communism as a form of economist practice could not be apply in real market circumstance, for the basic themes of haves and have not(s) which parade his Das Kapital was not an accurate diagnostic common market, and theory applied to its time was not only false but it was also misconceived economic theory. It is not wrong that those who are find the Das Kapital appealing were tellingly from lower ebb of the Society, some of the Chief proponents included Lenin and Stalin were actioners of little economic opulence, were variously tried in the attempt to redeem themselves from the perpetuated authority of their royalty and came to accept revolution as the only bullet out of the box.

It is not to suggest that Karl Marx was not accomplished theoretician and we are not expected to play folly to pressing problems of his Jewish people reduced to Ghetto and the messianic hopes of a better years which saw some meaning in relieving the Government the powers to decide the Market, yet in the difficult vise of the limits of his application, his was then and now a political revolution with no place for money and market. The ethereal fact that losses and profit combine to outfit a common market is not true, the claim which some Economist still repeat that concavity of one its convexity of another is not true, at best the realized attempt to underscore to the failures of Russian Communist exercises by Chinese Students is in spite of its originality quite original to Russia and Soviet Union that losses can be offset through a compulsory unemployment and losses in the local market can be trade-off through expediting the demands of one society by securing what they needed most, the most important needs of a province if truly established is expected to differ with some alternate province in the State.

It was the State that determines this range of demand and measures the limits of expectations in achieving the least possible for one province or the most for another as opposed to its expense. The Generality of distribution – no theater for price distribution and Savings theory – falls short of exactly promoting that the in real time economic conditions losses and profits essentially apply, but only to some extent as they apply to the Broad Index but on a whole, the nature of wealth of nations is one that is comfortable with the growth year on year. It is possible to grow your business with as much losses and profit, single digit only to the limits of participation but on the whole several well managed companies over a period of time do not shed that others will earn, they earn and growth simultaneously.

Here the premise of losses is applied only to a single banter and appeals to individual conceptions of one market which crushed under the difficult weight of ruling class is set to escape the obstacles by the dreams of a perfect union of Government and market which does not exist saving for oversight.

The Chinese Communist revolutions were done by poor people and general uneducated class but a different meaning under the leadership of enlightened but misdirect leaders….From Marx it is the final product from the effort of a first rate worker that determines the quality of a product. He is not blind to the forces of market is forcing price movement but this to him would be secondary or essentially an alternate system which should not replace the quality of a product through the hands of a worker. The Lenin-Marxist theories that were preached till late in the 70’s Nikita Khrushchev and by his General Sectaries in early part of 80’s by backing the formative GOK died a sudden death with the rise of Labor Unions in several parts of World.

The imperative of having Marshal Tito of Yugoslavia promote a loose orthodox Communism held a different meaning when applied to the impact that Unions will later have in Yugoslavia, hold a ‘Global spatial’ meaning in interpreting the problems of economic structure with the impact of the Unions who become so tall in a local or domestic market that engage under the pretenses of cheaper alternatives, strange and foreign markets where the transfer of capital was no longer a consideration among the subverted class, but the transfer of a worker’s product from one region to another determines the wealth basis of a nearly super rich. What many regard as the end of the Reagan administration or the Reagan economics as a period of symbolic American strength and end of the Cold war, was in many ways the beginning of new forms of economic activity, metered by the structure of workers Unions – AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organization) which had its moments after the end of World War II, Working in concert NRO, etc, were able to finance international referendum that empowered cross-border trades, cross-border transfer of Industries and factories, and in the end gave new birth and new meaning to the chain of causality leading and facing America in 2014. It is NAFTA of Salinas as buttressed by Henry Kissinger and Cyrus Garvey (?), Salinas adapting the prospects of the NAFTA under the garb of Tito, yet swelling on its living verdure the trunk of socialism with one eye on America Industries and the second on the limits of public intelligence.

These extremes of Industrial accounting;  in separating the Domestic themes of say a founding father; Alexander Hamilton and his Reports on Manufacturing, the division wrought by the cheap products from oppressed and enslaved South and the problems of prosperity on the backs of a Ricardo and the lavish theory of Comparative Advantage.

In this opening indictment of the wealth of error involved with NAFTA – itself a prosthesis of GATT, is that it took American Politicians of highest acumen – Gephardt, Gore, Bradley, Clinton(s), and Bush of ‘Bipartisan Oligarchy’ of the late 80’s through to 90’s to affirm the understudied Doctrines of NAFTA. For all we care about the 1993 organization of the treaty, we may or may not forget the efforts put in by far reaching New York Council men and women who in the persons of Sal Albanese to mention opposed the Treaty noting that it serves several purposes much of which was essentially negative. The transfer of American Industries to Mexico was a lease of life which fated the 1994 disasters in Mexico which led to a million workers losing their Job in combined oil crisis and companies shut downs due to Tariff and embargo commission and in petered outcomes gave impetus to Hunt Commission.

The equal measure of this transfer may have taken a new meaning from the attempts to undo the damages of NAFTA but more than the damages, it is the role of the Union Workers who held monopoly over the life and fortunes of its members and in New York more than anywhere else, the imbroglio of Sweeney who earned a few strips in defending workers in the earlier incarnation of the 70’s, remained a clog in the wheels that opposed NAFTA and in the end signed on a treaty that did not add the merits of Comparative Advantage with Mexico Debts (100 Billion at 1993) and the conversion rate of almost a 3, 000 pesos to a dollar. It was a fraud from beginning to the end, the end was no nowhere confined to Mexico since Italy, Spain and other near Second but really third World Europe of East and the West manicured existence and False Economy with cheap and undesirable exchange rate.            

There is something of the relationship between these remedies and the growth of US market which in many areas are challenged by the BRIC nations. There is nothing to deny that even Americans are not aware of the huge responsibility that the future holds for their country or are they physically prepared to engage the rest of the developing nations of the world. The problem US is facing with 'rising cost' of Energy and natural resources such as grains, metals, lumber and Interference from International conflicts and growth of small sector are problems which poor and sometimes mischievous economic practices are forcing on the nation. 

Europe in terms of the International world markets and International banking Standards such as Basel III, are so well trimmed that the even minor economic growth within the West of Europe is not essentially open to new comers let alone others from different ends of the earth. Here’s the conundrum, the poverty rate in Eastern Europe alone is quite comparable to what is available in many third world markets. It is possible to suggest that there are economic reasons why Europe has to censure the attention is getting from Asia, for if these Tariffs and organizations lower the standards as required by world markets, Europe may suffer additional shedding of the Economic maturity preeminent in 2014. Such process limits Europe as a truly International Open markets, and like Asia – who deliberately manipulate their economy and operate all shades of Shadow Banking (Moon-Walking) reverts to U.S and to some degree the British who are not free from the trims of international currency manipulation. We compare Canada to U.S, it is limits of its bearing vintage, at least, Canada is toeing a similar line of practice but it is a small market benefiting the larger franchise of World Market than India many times the size.  

But in the age increasingly defined by the productive aspiration is perhaps better rehearsed from shocking lack of consumption economies which are the problems in 2014. It may be equally difficult to escape the limits of Chinese success given the first fact that 80’s could in of itself be called a Japanese decade. But these period of moderation which the 6% combined conversion of Chinese to US is set in such a way as to project the strength of the Chinese Economy and its future role in the world, is a future whose learning curve is primarily due to U.S Debt to China and also the faith – which in the case holds no pretenses on the conception of US as the Major economy power in the world – would be estimated to play out when one economy ties itself too close to a more primary economy.  The success and decline of Japanese Economy, which now like China is in moderation, is due to the open market policies of the United States whose enviable economic policies is bankrupt in Japan.

We may not fail to establish the fact that the creation of Euro as a decoupling effect through overnight Chicago, was not understudied before introduction, that the main problems associated with such…is the underlining market structure which bank lending possible. In 2014 unlike the decades following the removal of U.S dollars from gold Standard in 1971, there are fewer and fewer Open Market Economies in the world, and there is no denying that the New Economy of Global markets was not enhance by the U.S actions in 1971. A comparative study of Japanese Automotive Industries and the overnight rise of its electronic productions may seem to suggest that it coincided with the larger roles of the Banks and the Federal Reserve following the removal of U.S dollars from Gold Standard. The debt of United States to much of the world as consequence of this singular act is essentially out of the charts.

The results are no less evident, for how could any economic society imagine the profits enjoyed by Japan and recent times, India and China, were obtained through the market or capital processes traditionally common to all markets. Perhaps a new definition of the markets are required, but to the extent that no type of economy can thrive without a Capitalist free market, it leaves us little or no room to beggar assumption that all political economics which is not Capitalist – however defined – is merely a process towards a free market. Barely two decades ago could we discuss possibility of Asia economy as miracle, that it was lacking in principle power house banks and had problems with foreign Investment Banks. but less than a 20 years when at least in our current experience and memory, Banks did not function in China except by diction from the seating Chairman, leaves us a thing of wonder if not beauty that in 2014, China has managed to manufacture 4 (four) of the leading 10 major Banks in the world.

In fact two of the top three banks in the World are from nowhere the biggest bank in the world and are China owned. The surprise is largely unclear given the….

Perhaps we should we worthy of the strange and long tales about the Chinese development Banks, how much they were worth even in the 1998 when for the best of us who were fortunate to hear Chinese Engineering graduate at City College CUNY, invited their students to China and to a future that could profit. These Banks were worth Billions, but not tens of Billions until the Amalgamation of several Key Chinese Banks. One of the most traditional Banks in China that was bound to its transformations as a manufacturing hub is China Development Bank. Its feature and its role in helping to transform Chinese resources from raw to manufacturing is intricately bound to the evolution of Communist State and also its transition from Communist State to Neo-Communism, practiced with lessons from the rise and collapse of Russia and the shrinking of Japan following an explosive decade of the 80s.   

But these period of moderation which the 6% combined conversion of Chinese to US is set in such a way as to project the strength of the Chinese Economy and its future role in the world, is a future whose learning curve is primarily due to U.S Debt to China and also the faith – which in the case holds no pretenses on the conception of US as the Major economy power in the world – would be estimated to play out when one economy ties itself too close to a more primary economy. 

The success and decline of Japanese Economy, which now like China is in moderation, is due to the open market policies of the United States whose enviable economic policies is bankrupt in Japan. We may not fail to establish the fact that the creation of Euro as a decoupling effect through overnight Chicago, was not understudied before introduction, that the main problems associated with such enterprise is the underlining market structure which make bank lending possible depends in part on return rate, that an IOU to China was a strategic placement of operation that enables a relationship between China and US to exist in the future.  

In 2014 unlike the decades following the removal of U.S dollars from gold Standard in 1971, there are fewer and fewer Open Market Economies in the world, and there is no denying that the New Economy of Global markets was not enhance by the U.S actions in 1971. A comparative study of Japanese Automotive Industries and the overnight rise of its electronic productions may seem to suggest that it coincided with the larger roles of the Banks and the Federal Reserve following the removal of U.S dollars from Gold Standard in 1971. The debt of United States to much of the world as consequence of this singular act is essentially out of the charts. The triumphs of China over its local problems coincided with the fall of Russia in the 70’s, and with arrival of Xiaoping, there was a new and awakened power in the East. The manifestation of China as a power in the world entered its own Tiger on the eve of EU introduction of a super single currency.

 It needs be compared from the past that a look at the resolutions of Russia during and after the Bolshevik resolutions, points a China there was in disrepute, rotten to its quick by the British preliterate ideologue and their proliferate French that barred each other’s way but with understanding suckered China into a local and under-developed market. With the rise of Russia, especially under Stalin, was a China riddled with uncertainties between Kuomintang and the Ming or Red Party led by Chairman Mao. The drug ragged Shanghai and the double functions of Du Yueh Sheng, the total collapse of Shanghai under finance minister and premier T.V Song and head of states Chiang-Kai-shek and his elder and younger sisters; Ai-ling and Mei Song summarizes determination under Chairman Mao and eventually Hua Guofeng who opened China to the rest of world.      

 But new sensation that China is besting invokes the past triumphs of powerful states, who in the last 50 years has seen Russia rise and in debacle – a debacle further complicated by the new measures of President Putin in separating Russia from certain areas of the world market. It was not a best way to replicate on a world sanctions, the better approach was to challenge the procedure in court, collectively as the United Nations, G-20, BRICS economic block, the MINT and individual members of the signatory in Courts of appeal of their individual nations. Such long process will meet the sanctions half way, enough to redeem what is left of sanction. Russia did not do this, yet there will already struggling from the total collapse of the long and powerful empire which they inherited from the Turks and ruled with their help.

The Japanese would be the next great wave whose export power and production hub transformed Japan and in fact Asia into one of the world’s leading technology areas. Japan came very close to overtaking the US in 1980-1982, but failed just by whiskers largely for the role of a SIC (V) Insurance Company called these days AIG. The spread of AIG into Asia; Philippines, Japan and China, was so charismatic that it may breathe easy on my comparative separation of quantity of money as a physical property and the use of digital cash-less technology not exactly like the Cards. Japan’s rise heralded its decline. Its reasons why so different from Russia ascending and descent, that new falcon on the block that would surpass America was said by Robert Mundel not to be easily available. In limelight of the actions performed against third world economies with more than a share of Tiger money to buttress, for instance money derived from cash crop may have found its way to the hands of those in power, may have found it way as a form of default and above all, it looks like the saying is equally correct that the idea behind regional formation of currency may have been based on John Nash’s ‘Governing Dynamics’ which from his essays, seem to dovetail on the fact that in chain of ….in other to release the forces held by the

But the difference is that U.S was expected to protect its local interest by ‘evolution’ its own market without relapsing into any major would markets as opposed to the political ‘revolution’ of Communist East and Russia which then and now has the backing of the Government. Russia is a giant in with old spades, has no meaning for New World economy, can be argued to be counter-weight for the U.S economy at least up to the late 70’s, but in the arrears of the ensuing years since the end of World Wars, has gradually cleaved its wing in Shadows and in recent no more than a shadow of its past. Perhaps the greatest impact of the Euro is that the forced the Eastern corridors into the Global Macro, that the blanket weight of a communist challenged Russia in Eastern Europe was no proving mark for a First tier market, and in spite of Ukraine in this Age, we are no longer at the mercy of GLOBULUS.

   

1. Between the popular fronts of economic governments and the attempts by South East Asia especially Japan to adapt to new frontiers on economic principles are realities that are impossible to measure without the dimly lighted U.S economy. Some of the Grand Strategies of Meiji Government after the disaster of Hiroshima, popularly led by Yoshida who was also admired by the larger Liberal International Markets, is set with view of appropriating the benefits of world markets for the Good of Japan, including loans to companies on interest with Foreign Penetration. This Strategy particularly favored by the mining industries encouraged the direct acquisition of foreign companies through state sponsored monetary channels. The result of these was the rise of a nation that emphasized production but defended its territory by limiting the penetration of foreign investment through means and ways that is now and then a Toyota riddle.  The Tokyo riddle is no doubt similar with Russia Paradox itself the theme of a book by Sewreyen Bialer (Soviet Paradox; 1986), with the view of external expansion which held the Communist Nation from the 1949 through the 1983, to an extent that the massive expansion of these two giants, a front for the reality that China will brace, lead to some poor Internal regulation or true measure of internal return creating a decline that was not well known till the lost 90’s decade of Japan. However we place the expansion of Japan in the 80's, its consequent moderation or decline of overnight sensations could not be called an accident. We are looking at the impact economic crusades had on the world, beginning perhaps its periods of expansion, should be able to confirm that following an extra-ordinary expansion of any market is the fait accompli of a decline or perhaps a periods of moderation and attempt at balancing or market been able to correct itself...., For reasons that are quoted elsewhere and explicated by risk managers and experts, there are no elements of surprises if the strain on Communist China to deepen, with or without due inflationary pressure, no surprises when it fractures at its some point and no surprises leading to a decade of moderation. Unlike the 80's, there are more countries in the world whose market policies are mainly driven by supply side, unlike the past market conditions are strained, and fewer consumptive markets exist, unlike Japan, China is a billion market with sparing investment capacity.
2. But this is not take case, the issue is the market expectations at some point, to the extent to which the rest of well to do world is seeking abortive means of generating impressions of economic progress but are left furlough when now unlike the healthy American State in the late 60’s and 70’s, is a State that is struggling with its own problems. In one way or another, there are fewer and fewer states that toe the older liberal world markets whose existence would be said to ensure the sensation of these new economic blocks.

The US debt is well of 50 trillion dollars as at 2012 and but the Nation somehow manages to hang in there as the number one country in the world with 15 trillion dollars GDP, followed closely by the China with up to 8 trillion dollar GDP at 2012. But the facts that US are facing a stiff competition from the BRICS for instance suggest that the world is expanding almost as simultaneously as the United States that these nations should share the burdens associated with a liberal economy. In the years preceding the arrival of Deng Xiaoping as Chinese premier it is on record that China owed the rest of world almost nothing, that since the 80’s when BEOING finally mounted Chinese first Airplane Plant in an old abandoned warehouse, and Chinese Debt has climbed. But if we compare China to US in terms of Debt to Earnings, China is perhaps a higher pedestal than US. Given the prevailing economic communities of BRIC Nations such as Brazil and China, and going from the spectacle of Leading Economic Indicators (LEI) of the world, it is easy to however break the ice that indicative national economic environment of these nations for instance the prospective list on stock exchange, hardly justify the economic weights projected. China is quite an example and in so far as the BRICS, is as good they come.

We are not to subtract the Community of hopefuls on China from real time economies of the world, but Chinese economic policies and degree of transparency still disappoint. No country that pampers itself as a worthy challenge of major economies of the world should box itself to a corner or arbitrarily operate in shadow. The relevance of China to the rest of world may dominate world market opinions for a very long time and be determined by its moderation to the disciplines of World Market systems which are really System Dynamics. Cloud Computing….

We can assume that given the amount of industries available in the States versus the Chinese, should try out patience but there is an argument to be made about the return to Shenzhen. India is worthy of consideration as any would expect, but it still wears the goggle of Third World Economy given the wider population to feed. In US, we are spectators of the dangling issue of Social Security and the attempt at reforming Medicare and Medicaid with Obamacare.

The role of Obama Care in trying to wrestle the problems of inflation in US and reduce the issue of US debt may discovered in the pages of the Paul Krugman’s ‘The Conscience of a Liberal’ where in pages 224 through 242, particularly 242 where he mentioned that employers and Insurance companies ‘mitigate’ the Welfare of their employees by choosing who to insure. It was pointless to mention that those without hope of surviving on a long term basis and not adequately insured are left for the dead, or left to shift from individual pay as you go to US managed Welfare constitution and these people account for the worst Welfare cases. Krugman’s ‘Conscience of a Liberal’ is arguably his best book, which was recognized by international committee leading to his Noble Prize. Krugman’s anti-IMF and World Bank position is not different from the Joseph Stieglitz opposition to Washington Consensus but he managed this from the problems of 2008 financial collapse which neither him or even Robert Shiller can actually claim to have written significantly about it. For a fact the ‘Great Unraveling’ would to have been taken from a page in Richard Parker's ‘John Kenneth Galbraith; His Life, His Politics, His Economics’ where the delivered the unraveling leading to the problems of government intervention removed from the intentions of the original thinkers.