[Marxism] China's nationalized sector has keyrole incurrentgains
lueko.willms at t-online.de
Mon Oct 12 18:11:26 MDT 2009
S. Artesian (sartesian at earthlink.net) wrote on 2009-10-05 at 16:13:27 in
about Re: [Marxism] China's nationalized sector has key role in current gains:
> Fixed asset investment in steel however has grown at about a 10-11% rate
> according to China's National Bureau of Statistics-- so assuming, and yes,
> I'm assuming by converting that 10% directly and totally into production
> capacity -- we, the we being those of us who are still reading the
> post -- get > 550 million tons. So then we take our co-branded
> solar-powered Sharp-New York Yankees calculator
> [made in China, by the way]
you prefer to have it manufactured in the USA?
> in hand and divide 430 by 550, we get a ratio of consumption
> to capacity of .78 or 78 percent -- or about 22% of overcapacity.
Any way, you say that investment is resulting in net increase, and there is
no replacement of inefficient, older factories, and on the other hand, you are
ignoring changes in consumption. Good for an agitator, bad for a statistician.
S. Artesian (sartesian at earthlink.net) wrote on 2009-10-05 at 22:53:29 in
about Re: [Marxism] China's nationalized sector has keyrole
> China is not overproducing steel to flood the world market and drive out its
> Japanese, Korean, Indian, European competitors. Exports from China ,
> Nestor, have plunged, although maybe you haven't heard.
On the contrary. China is still one of the largest (if not _the_ largest)
> Nobody has criticized overproduction of steel in China as "wrong" because
> the market can't swallow it. Nobody has criticized overproduction at all.
> It is a fact of capitalism. It is a fact of China's integration into world
Then why do you get so excited every time we talk about China? Why this
zeal of an agitator against China? It seems that you are against China
producing steel in the first place (maybe instead of importing it from the
USA?), as you are against China developing its infrastructure (e.g. railways).
For me you are just a strange China-hater.
You are getting too much excitement about the facts of the world we have
to live in (I am also quite astonished about your excitement regarding the
Allow me to repeat the question which you have repeatedly avoided to
reply: do you see in the Pol-Pot-Regime a sensible way?
visit http://www.mlwerke.de Marx, Engels, Luxemburg, Lenin, Trotzki in
More information about the Marxism