Why are 'things' from China so cheap?

[Jet2]

I wish I were MichaelA. :edevil:

I am actually from Hong Kong and I am living in Shanghai currently.

 

So dear all, if you do have interest, welcome to China.

[DougF]

I found this in the news today, hope you don't mind me sticking it in this thread.

 

China's global trade surplus up 47%

 

The nation's biggest gap is again with the U.S. By Beijing's count' date=' it amounted to $163 billion, up 13% from 2006.

By Don Lee, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

3:49 AM PST, January 11, 2008

SHANGHAI — Despite a series of product recalls that tarnished the "Made in China" label, China's global trade surplus jumped 47% in 2007 from the previous year to a record $262 billion, the government reported today. But exports grew at a slower pace last month, an indication of weakening demand tied to the teetering U.S. economy.

 

In December, China's trade surplus fell to $22.7 billion from $26.2 billion in November. For the last three months, the value of China's imports has grown faster than the value of exports. Though that was partly the result of higher prices for imports of oil and other commodities, if the trend continues it could curb China's overall surplus and reduce tension with the U.S. and other trading partners.

 

For all of 2007, however, China's total exports rose by 25.7% to $1.218 trillion. Imports were up by 20.8% to $955.8 billion, according to the General Administration of Customs. The resulting surplus was $262 billion, compared with $177.5 billion in 2006 and $102 billion in 2005.

 

In 2007, China's biggest trade gap was once again with the U.S. By China's count, that surplus amounted to $163 billion, up 13% from 2006. That was a slower rate than prior recent years, as China's imports from the U.S. this year grew faster than its exports to America.

 

It was the reverse for the European Union. China's trade surplus with the EU widened by 46% in 2007 to $134 billion. That has prompted stronger calls from EU leaders for Beijing to let China's currency rise significantly in value, which would tend to make Chinese goods more expensive in overseas markets.

[/quote']

 

China's global trade surplus up 47% - Los Angeles Times

[Michaelangelica]

If the Chinese let their currency rise they loose money from their O/S $ massive reserves. (+make Chinese goods dearer).

 

Although with the US$ loosing value, that seems to be happening- despite what the Chinese want.

 

We live in inserting times.

 

PS

I found this in the news today, hope you don't mind me sticking it in this thread.

It is not up to me to mind This is a e-community just because I started the thread doesn't mean I own it. I am just glad a few others find it interesting too otherwise I would have more egg on my face.

The article was very interesting and appropriate. I thought.

[Mike C]

I just purchased and excellent pair of gardening 'clippers' (secateurs) for AUD $3 (c $2.20 US).

 

They were made of cast aluminum and weighed 270 grams.

 

I have purchased similar secateurs for $15-$25 in previous years.

 

Assuming the shop paid $1.50 for them, then take out freight, customs, importer margin etc., etc What is the factory in China getting? 50-75cents?

 

How can they even buy the aluminum for that price let alone transport, melt, cast it and package it?

(I tried to look up the international price of aluminium but couldn't find it)

 

Is China deliberately keeping the exchange rate of their currency low?

 

Is that why things are so unnaturally cheap?

 

Hey, this is a goivernment monopoly. If it was a free enterprise system, capitalism would have a 'field day' enriching themselves with the inflated profits they would help themselves to.

 

Mike C

[Jet2]

Why are 'things' from China so cheap?

 

Because it's from China.

 

Please excuse my laziness and naughtiness.

Hey it's Saturday man!

[Michaelangelica]

The tiger is not yet roaring

 

 

 

Tim Colebatch

January 22, 2008

Page 1 of 3 | Single page

Illustration: Dyson

 

A FEW days before Christmas, the world suddenly shrank. The distances from one side of the globe to another did not change. Rather, the value of the goods and services we 6.25 billion people produce was abruptly reduced.

At one stroke, the real value of the world's output was slashed by roughly $A8000 billion.

That's like suddenly losing China. It's something we should notice.

 

The agent of death was not global famine, but a long-awaited report to the World Bank by a team headed by former Australian Statistician Dennis Trewin.

Its mission was to carry out a rigorous comparison of the prices of goods and services throughout the world. Its findings have caused a shock.

 

It found that prices of goods and services in China were far higher relative to the West than previously assumed. In India, exhaustive price measures carried out for the team by local statisticians found there, too, prices were much higher than expected — as they were in most of the developing world.

. . . .

The biggest change was in China. The value of China's output alone was 40% less than previously assumed. We had thought China was on track to overtake the United States by 2010 and become the world's biggest economy. No: in 2005, it was not much bigger than Japan.

The tiger is not yet roaring - Tim Colebatch - Opinion - theage.com.au

[Michaelangelica]

[freeztar]

That's hilarious. :lol:

[DougF]

BUT TRUE

[Michaelangelica]

From my absolute favourite website:-

Despair, Inc.

Discovery

Discovery

A company that will go to the ends of the Earth for its people will find it can hire them for about 10% of the cost of Americans.

- Dramatically improving the performance statistics of employees in domestic call centres

- Disaffected college graduates.

motre demotivators here

View All Demotivators®