[–] 2 points 3 months ago

According to data from the Chinese government, even U.S. imports from China are on the rise ...

This is not true.

U.S. imports from China in the first five months 2026 are around a third lower than in the comparable 2025-period, according to the U.S. census data (you can safely forget trade data published by the Chinese government, especially since Beijing introduced a very weird methodology to calculate its export/import data during the pandemic).

U.S. imports from China in 2025 were around a third lower than in 2024.

Of course, any perceived inflation benefit of importing must be offset by the fact that domestic producers are potentially being undercut, making their businesses less prosperous.

Unfortunately, Goldman Sachs, which was one of the first Western banks to open a Chinese branch in China more than 30 years ago with strong ties to the ruling party, does not elaborate here.

The 'perceived inflation benefit' (is the inflation now perceived or real?) comes at a lower GDP, lower level of employment, and, therefore, a lower disposable income for other markets (such as Europe); not to forget that it makes countries vulnerable for Chinese political and economic coercion as we have increasingly seen in recent years.

It is particularly noteworthy that the alleged inflation is being paid to a large extent by people in China and China-controlled supply chains who work under forced labour schemes.

These are major points in my opinion which Goldman Sachs has forgotten to mention.

“Although the main driver of our relatively benign inflation outlook is that domestic supply and demand broadly appear in balance, ...

I don't understand that. Domestic supply and demand isn't in balance in China, that's for sure. Maybe someone can enlighten me.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    Paywall.

    But based on the first sentence, the "Economic Success"

    1. Only goes to the regime, not the people.
    2. Partly comes from being unethical enough to sell arms to Russia.
    3. Partly comes from, essentially, payoffs from China for being a buffer state to the west.
  • source
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Black swan implies it wasn't predictable, and that it's an unprecedented change. A 4 year high from an entirely predictable action isn't a Black swan event. All we're seeing is the entirely predictable stress of a dumb ass closing a major shipping channel. It's serious, but not as bad as the covid supply chain mess.

    Get back to me when we have a 50 year high due to a sudden weather event or revolution.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago*

    China’s dominance in renewable energy isn’t surprising. It’s the predictable result of massive state investment in green infrastructure while Western democracies remain captured by fossil fuel interests. When one system can direct capital toward long-term strategic goals and the other is paralyzed by legalized bribery, this is what happens.

  • source