Welcome to ornacle.com on January 8 2009.
This is an internet experiment running to monitor browsing habbits of individuals through wikipedia contents.

Talk:Economy of the People's Republic of China

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Economy of the People's Republic of China is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
January 14, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted
 This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Business      (Rated B-Class)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Business on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low rated as Low-importance on the assessment scale
WikiProject Economics      (Rated B-Class)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Echo      (Vietnamese)
Economy of the People's Republic of China is a featured article on the Vietnamese Wikipedia.
This article has an assessment summary page.
edit · history · watch · refresh To-do list for Economy of the People's Republic of China:

Here are some tasks you can do:

    Contents


    [edit] Checklist / to do (see archives)

    • Article needs updating
    • List the trading agreements/blocs that China is party to or a member of
    • Include the exchange rate of Yuan to the US Dollar during 1950-80
    • Inflation over 10 years
    • A logarithmic graph to replace [complement] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Prc1952-2005gdp.gif
    • Some tables, graphs etc showing trends
    • Recent economic history
    • Components of Manufacturing
    • Banking and Financial Services
    • Other Services eg telecommunications, sales, retail etc
    • Manufacturing Industries eg food and drink, capital equipment, electonics, etc
    • Knowledge based industry eg biotechnology, medical research and development
    • I think this article contains significant information which ought to be integrated into the article. It seems some trends are being set which will result in major changes. Fred Talk 13:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

    Strangely, many of these Checklist items seem to imply that the data is somehow reliable. Given the broad view that it is not nearly as reliable as OECD data, items such as logrithmic graphs would likely give an erroneous impression that the underlying data are worth citing. DOR (HK) (talk) 03:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Macroeconomic Trends

    I've updated the data, and added some historical data for inflation and the renminbi. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC) DOR (HK) Jan 27, 2008

    Does anyone know what year this refers to? For purchasing power parity comparisons, the US dollar is exchanged at 2.05 CNY only. I ask because a single year reference without a date is worthless. DOR (HK) (talk) 02:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC) DOR (HK) Jan 31, 2008.

    If I understand purchasing power parity right, it refers to the lower prices in China which makes Chinese money go further if purchases are made there. For example, pork, now considered "high" in China still sells for less than a dollar a pound while pork in the US sells for about $2.50 a pound. The quoted figure illustrates the value, expressed in dollars, of how much a yuan will buy in the domestic Chinese market which has generally low prices due to generally low wages. It is a kind of comparison between the market basket a dollar or euro will buy in the US or Europe and the market basket a yuan will buy in China. Fred Talk 14:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
    Your understanding is correct, but an dated PPP rate is worthless. DOR (HK) (talk) 03:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] PPP, Nominal

    One statistic has China breathing down on the US. ready to over take it. The other statistic shows that China shouldn't even be considered as any economic threat to the US. A difference of 10 trillion dollars is fairly large, no? What should be the standard economic measurement?

    -G

    The standard (generally more reliable) economic measurement would be PPP; in other words, the statistic where 'China is breathing down on the US'. Nominal terms refers to the Chinese statistic when converted to US dollars. However, given that the Chinese currency is almost certainly badly undervalued, measuring in nominal terms will definitely undervalue the economy as a whole. PPP, on the other hand, measures in 'real terms'.

    Both forms of measurement have their flaws, so I would suggest keeping both. 118.167.233.204 (talk) 05:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

    Good idea, we should probably keep both, although there is an error - the table says for nominal GDP (2007) China is "ranked 3rd", which links to the list of countries by nominal GDP. However, this very list places Germany ahead of China (consistently - IMF, WMO, and CIA all have China at 4th). I couldn't find this when i tried to edit the page. Can someone fix it? --Aoe3rules (talk) 15:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

    There is no sound reason why the "standard economic measurement" should be PPP rather than bricks, bales or bucks. Indeed, as PPP is an artifical exchange rate created to provide an artificial international comparison, it is quite arguably less useful than market exchange rates. Anyone wishing to give me a single market exchange rates dollars for any number of PPP dollars will have a willing partner with whom to transact. DOR (HK) (talk) 03:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Too long

    This article is way too long and could use come copyediting to be simplified. Most of the sections have their own subarticles anyways.--Kozuch (talk) 22:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


    [edit] Bias

    This article seems to be written from a rather anti-Communist, pro-Capitalist point of view at many times. What's more, many of the statments need more references, as the listed ones are not nearly neutral enough to stand on their own in many cases...

    Works of Sweat (talk) 15:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

    At the time of writing I actually think the reverse is true. This article seems to me to be biased towards communism and against Capitalism. Ryan Albrey (talk) 16:49, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


    [edit] Inconsitancies

    This article mentions labor shortages and unemployment, high effectiveness of the population control programs and failing effectiveness of the population control programs in almost the same breath. There are some clear inconsistancies in this article, and almost all of them take a negative view of China's prospects...

    There are also some highly inconsistant parts about the use of commodities normally used to produce animal feed being used to produce fuel driving UP the cost of fuel (this would actually drive DOWN the cost of fuel) *possibly* showing more of the same attempts of anti-biofuel trolls attempting to paint the worst possible picture of biofuels, even if this means making illogical and inconsistent statements about the effects of biofuel production (or possibly just showing a lack of understanding on the part of the writers of these inconsistent statements).

    Works of Sweat (talk) 16:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] GDP?

    I don't think it's over 7 trillion. i just checked CIA factbook, and it says 6.991 trillion for GDP. I also checked the GDP page of wiki, and it says 7 trillion under CIA estimate, so which one to take? I say underestimating is usually better. CIA China page in the Factbook https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ch.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.212.11.67 (talk) 01:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

    Yes, there was a mistake made up until last year that estimated the Chinese economy as 40% larger than it is in actuality. I changed the table to reflect modern GDP PPP estimates. --Ben 14:38, 6 September 2008 (PST)

    [edit] Repeated Text

    The line "emphasized raising personal income and consumption and introducing new management systems to help increase productivity" is repeated in both the second paragraph of the Introduction and the First paragraph of the 1980-1990 section, is there any real need for this? 81.105.162.252 (talk) 10:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

    Personal tools

    Visit joltnews for the latest headlines
    Visit bloit.com for company information
    Geed Media does computer consulting on long island.
    This page viewed times. See Logs