(1) Neil Gough, 中国经济放缓,突显就业不平衡. 纽约时报中文网, Apr 23, 2015.
cn.nytimes.com/china/20150423/c23chinajobs/
, which is translated from
Neil Gough, Lopsided Job Market Puts Strain on China; Many struggle to find jobs they expected. New York Times, Apr 22, 2015.
www.nytimes.com/2015/04/22/busin ... ing-job-market.html
My comment:
(a) Excerpt in the window of print: Rising debt stresses manufacturing as agriculture shrinks.
What debt? “And China’s huge manufacturing sector is showing new signs of stress, as some companies struggle with rising debt and rampant overcapacity.” paragraph 5 in the English original.
(b) There is no need to read the report.
(c)
(i) Just view the graphic (which does not appear in the translation at cn.nytimes.com, but appears in print of English original that depicts the vicissitude of three sectors (agriculture, industry and services) in China from 1965 to 2013 (inclusive).
(ii) Actually the vicissitude is not that important (because we all know the trend). What is critical is the following two consecutive paragraphs in the original:
"China’s premier, Li Keqiang, recently sought to play down the importance of the GDP growth target, saying instead that he preferred to focus on whether the economy was expanding in a way that created new jobs. And so far, it appears to be doing that. China added 13.2 million new urban jobs last year, surpassing Mr Li’s official target of 10 million such jobs. [So far so good.*]
"But Mr Li’s jobs target is a gross figure. It does not factor in jobs that were eliminated. And more important, income growth is decelerating, down from double digits to around 8 percent last year. Any resulting pullback in consumer spending would have a direct impact on the service sector’s ability to continue to create jobs.
(A) You see, I had a posting on Apr 21, titled "China's Economy Coming down to Earth: The Economist." In that posting, at note (8) I expressed amazement at China's figure, and wondered aloud, "[W]as that too good to be true?"
(B) Look, there Note (8)(iii) shows "1-Month Net Change" in "total nonfarm" (compiled by BLS).
(C) This NYT report tells us China's figure is NOT net change. Because China did not tell how many jobs were eliminated, there is no telling the net change. |