there are many questions directed at you in this thread here but you did not answer. you can carry on dancing in circles.Originally posted by Salman:You see, you fellas avoid the salient points and stary off w/o answering my questions.
Where is your proof that a growing china created jobs in Singapore? What abiout the jobs they took from us?
even if they're not lost to china, would we continue to hold onto them? do you think those same jobs would not in turn be lost to other developing nations?Originally posted by Salman:How do you explain the lost jobs to China?
Had they not undervalued the Yuan, many jobs would not have shifted there.
Whatever jobs that are agined from export to china can never be replaced by the job losses from thsi region. Its simple logic. What are your answers to all this?
I know you will surely avoid it.
I just debunked you.Originally posted by snow leopard:even if they're not lost to china, would we continue to hold onto them? do you think those same jobs would not in turn be lost to other developing nations?
[/quote]
Aha so now you do admit we do lose jobs to China.
Had there not been a devalued yuan, would we have kept those jobs? Yes. Why else do you think they kept it devalued in the first place?We do lose high tech jobs to China like hardisk manufacturing. Singapore was the biggest exporter of hdd for two decades. It lost now because of the heavy export subsidy by China.
our exports to china are high technology components like LCD panels. the jobs lost to china are labour intensive assembling of LCD panels to make the final LCD displays. jobs lost are low tech, low value add, low pay. jobs gained are high tech, high value add that provide good income for our workers. this on the whole is bad?
[quote]
do we really have to spoon feed you answers all the time? you can't even reason out this simple logic and you have the cheek to talk about poking fun. more like poking at your own intelligence ... or lack of it.
Originally posted by Salman:
Aha so now you do admit we do lose jobs to China.
Had there not been a devalued yuan, would we have kept those jobs? Yes. Why else do you think they kept it devalued in the first place?
i've only just started contributing my thoughts on this issue, so since when have i denied that jobs are lost to china? any idiot knows that investments are pouring into china. so what? even if investments weren't pouring into china they would be pouring into india, vietnam, malaysia, thailand, indonesia, philippines ... you think they'd pour into singapore you idiot? is that all to your simplistic and unsophisticated argument?
in the first place, devaluation is debatable. and since it is debatable i cannot accept it as a reason for our job losses or china's success.
china's cost base is so low that with or without devaluation (which is in itself debatable), we wouldn't have been able to keep our jobs. if our future depended on keeping low cost labour jobs, you had better be prepared for a poorer future.
there is a whole lot more to china's success than the so-called devaluation (which is a myth to some academics really). if devaluation is their key to succes then why aren't the other nation's devaluating their currencies as well?
We do lose high tech jobs to China like hardisk manufacturing. Singapore was the biggest exporter of hdd for two decades. It lost now because of the heavy export subsidy by China.
technology improves by leaps and bounds. what was once high tech manufacturing has now become low tech. so my point still stands what we lose to india, china or zimbabwe, we lose because it has become a commodity. we don't cry over lost commodity, i wonder why you do?
I just debunked you.
Notonly do lost jobs in Singapore directly affected us, lost jobs from the region to China also affected us. All these are made worst with the undervalued yuan.
no you just turned fact into myth and flunked with your lousy argument. devaluation is debatable and mostly claimed by the yankees and his allies. it is merely one sided argument that represents the interests of one side, just like in the 80s when the yankees complained about the yen being undervalued when it couldn't compete with the japanese manufacturing juggernauts.
what i may say is this. suppose indonesia devalues its currency by 20% (that is the estimate given by the yankees) to match china's supposed (not proven) devaluation. would manufacturers flock to indonesia? africa's even poorer. surely they can afford even lower wages?
there is more to competition than just costs. what about productivity? throughout your entire rethoric, you never once mentioned about productivity, you supposedly finance and economics ace.
come to think about it, all your postings are mere regurgitations of yankee rhetorics.
Less will be lost had they not kept the yuan undervalued.
i've only just started contributing my thoughts on this issue, so since when have i denied that jobs are lost to china? any idiot knows that investments are pouring into china. so what? even if investments weren't pouring into china they would be pouring into india, vietnam, malaysia, thailand, indonesia, philippines ... you think they'd pour into singapore you idiot? is that all to your simplistic and unsophisticated argument?
So why do you think they keep the yuan restricted if it is not undervalued? What for?
in the first place, devaluation is debatable. and since it is debatable i cannot accept it as a reason for our job losses or china's success.
It is so low cost because of the undervaluation. Thats exactly the point!
china's cost base is so low that with or without devaluation (which is in itself debatable), we wouldn't have been able to keep our jobs. if our future depended on keeping low cost labour jobs, you had better be prepared for a poorer future.
Undervaluation is one of the main component to that growth. I say take it off and compete fairly.
there is a whole lot more to china's success than the so-called devaluation (which is a myth to some academics really). if devaluation is their key to succes then why aren't the other nation's devaluating their currencies as well?
HDD is not a commodity.
technology improves by leaps and bounds. what was once high tech manufacturing has now become low tech. so my point still stands what we lose to india, china or zimbabwe, we lose because it has become a commodity. we don't cry over lost commodity, i wonder why you do?
So why do you think they kept the yuan restricted? What for if the yuan isn't undervalued?
no you just turned fact into myth and flunked with your lousy argument. devaluation is debatable and mostly claimed by the yankees and his allies. it is merely one sided argument that represents the interests of one side, just like in the 80s when the yankees complained about the yen being undervalued when it couldn't compete with the japanese manufacturing juggernauts.
Yes, more manufacturers would indeed flock to Indonesia and accelerate joblesses in China and Singapore.
what i may say is this. suppose indonesia devalues its currency by 20% (that is the estimate given by the yankees) to match china's supposed (not proven) devaluation. would manufacturers flock to indonesia? africa's even poorer. surely they can afford even lower wages?
Productivity is related to costs isn't it?
there is more to competition than just costs. what about productivity? throughout your entire rethoric, you never once mentioned about productivity, you supposedly finance and economics ace.
come to think about it, all your postings are mere regurgitations of yankee rhetorics.
It is about the Trade Surplus in USD that China has. It is more political than economical for the revaluation.Originally posted by Salman:Productivity is related to costs isn't it?
Originally posted by Salman:
Less will be lost had they not kept the yuan undervalued.
Less would have been lost from the region too had there been no under valuation. Thats the point.
in the first place, the yankees who claim that yuan is undervalued cannot actually prove it is. so unless you can prove to us that the yuan is indeed undervalued, you have no basis to attibute job losses to it.
even if yuan were indeed undervalued (for argument's sake, not agweement), how much less job losses would we have had? two factories? two machines? two workers? tell us how much difference would it have made? and tell us what is the point of lambasting china for undervaluation if it actually wouldn't have made any difference?
So why do you think they keep the yuan restricted if it is not undervalued? What for?
stability. our currency is pegged too albeit to a basket of currencies.
It is so low cost because of the undervaluation. Thats exactly the point!
it is low because china's only beginning to rise from proverty. undervaluation is merely an allegation and unless you can prove it, there is no point attributing china's low cost to it.
Undervaluation is one of the main component to that growth. I say take it off and compete fairly.
is that mere allegation or can you actually prove it? if it is allegation what is there to take off? even if your so called undervaluation did take place (for argument's sake, not agweement), the wage discrepancy is still so wide, far wider than any productivity can make up for so what fairness or unfairness is there to talk about?
if you want to be fair, you should think this way. we have a sixth of the world's population locked in virtual poverty for the last couple of hundred years that is finally free to improve it's livelihood and grow out of poverty. instead of feeling happy for them you actually feel indignation?
HDD is not a commodity.
in a stable country with an abundance of cheap, hardworking workers with the capacity to absorb new knowledge, few things are beyond their capacity to commoditize, the same way india is commoditizing IT.
So why do you think they kept the yuan restricted? What for if the yuan isn't undervalued?
they kept the yuan pegged, whether or not it was at a fair value is still debatable even amongst economists so unless you think you're more illustrious than those economists, i suggest you keep your limited understanding to yourself.
for stability. if undervaluation is the key to their success, then isn't it a simple solution for all those who allege unfairness to undervalue as well?
Yes, more manufacturers would indeed flock to Indonesia and accelerate joblesses in China and Singapore.
your yes is not worth a penny and certainly not worth taking seriously. in fact, it only shows how ridiculously stupid you are. indonesia is political unstable so investors dare not put too much into that basket. your supposed under / over valuation wouldn't have affected investors' confidence in indonesia, least of all influence china's growth.
Productivity is related to costs isn't it?
costs or wages alone tell only half the story. you are complaining about the supposed under valuation of the yuan. supposed under valuation of the yuan supposedly affects only wages. it doesn't say anything about how much you can produce with those low wages. low wages in indonesia produce low output, but low wages in china produce high output, that's why investors flock there.
you don't even know your basic economics yet you claim to have aced finance and economics. no wonder our nation is faltering, we have idiots like you ace-ing our schools who needs to be taught economics by an engineer.
in short, yuan is just an inconsequential factor in china's success story, be it over or under valued. of greater consequence is the influx of a virtually inexhaustible (for the time being) supply of low cost labour from the countryside and a culture with the capacity for hardwork, learning and improvement.
No, that's naive... It will move to the next low labour cost country likely Vietnam. Our govt has infact lay basic foundation there.Originally posted by Salman:You are wrong, if 1RMB = 1SGD, lots of factories will immediately move back to Singapore.