Real Estate Market Policies Ineffective, Prices Still Rising

Real estate listings at a booth in China.

Real estate listings at a booth in China.

From Sina:

Two years of policy adjustments and regulations fail to bring down housing prices, local governments secretly buoyed markets June 26th report. Although “history’s most severe” real estate adjustment measures and regulations have now been in force for two years, media are still pointing out that housing prices throughout the country’s large and medium-sized cities have not actually fallen when compared to two years ago when policies limiting purchases were first enacted. However, this is related to how various local governments have undermined the central government’s purchasing limit policies through their own “fine-tuning”, thereby loosening such purchasing restrictions leading to increases in both quantity of sales and prices.

First-tier city housing prices have not dropped, remain at pre-adjustment levels

Over the past two years of policies and regulations [aimed at “correcting” or “cooling” the real estate market], just whether or not housing prices have dropped or risen has been the subject of much attention throughout society. According to a China Business Times report on June 25th, when compared to the peak two years ago, housing prices in first-tier cities like Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou have not dropped at all. At the same time, the vast majority of housing prices in 70 large and medium-sized cities throughout the country have also not dropped since two years ago when the real estate market adjustment policies were launched.

Likewise, according to a June 25th report by Securities Times, recently Beijing housing prices have been consistently creeping upwards, with average prices around 18,000 yuan [per square meter] a month ago now nearly breaking the 20,000 mark.


Local governments secretly propped up markets, “fine tuning” the central government’s house purchasing limit policies

Previously, various state ministries and commissions including the MOHURD [Minsitry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development], NDRC [National Development and Reform Commission], CBRC [China Banking Regulatory Commission], and China’s Central Bank had issued a statement denying recent comments about a loosening of the real estate market. Likewise, in May of this year, while in investigating the state of the economy in Wuhan, Premier of the State Council Wen Jiabao also indicated stabilizing real estate market adjustment and regulation policies, and strictly implementing differential housing credit, taxation policies, and purchasing limit policies.

However, the central government’s many statements did not prevent local governments from using “fine tuning” of the purchasing limit policies to achieve goals of propping up the markets. According to data from the market research department of Beijing Centaline [a real estate agency], from the second half of 2011, 33 cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Hangzhou, Chongqing, Xiamen, Wuhan, Heifei, Nanjing, Changzhou, Jilin, Zhongshan, Changchun, Wuhu, Conghua, Ma’anshan, and Shenyang have instituted various fine-tuning policies, the contents of which involve items such as the purchasing limit policy, land transfers, normal residential standards, preferential taxation, and home purchasing subsidies. Other than cities like Wuhu, Foshan, and Chengdu whose fine tuning measures went too far and were halted no long after they were enacted, all other [fine tuning] policies were essentially tacitly allowed.

READ  Chinese Tourists Arrested For Sexual Harassment in Japan

Comments from Sina:


Adjustments have failed yet again. Without real estate taxes and vacancy taxes, and so long as the country is not networked and government official don’t make public their real estate holdings, everything else is just bullshit! Government regulation has gotten weak yet again.


Their [the government] finances rely on real estate, and they have so many houses in their hands, so how could prices possibly go down?


I’m in a third-tier city and housing prices here not only haven’t dropped, they’ve risen a lot, from 2500 yuan per square meter 3 years ago to 3800 yuan now… The ordinary common people still cannot afford it! …How come the more real estate policies are adjusted [to bring down prices], the more expensive they are becoming!!!


To trust the government to adjust [lower] housing prices is simply a big joke!


Those who haven’t felt prices dropping, please raise your hands [upvote this comment]!!!


No matter what the reasons is for prices not lowering, ultimately those who suffer are still the impoverished ordinary common people! Ultimately those who benefit are still the government, real estate developers, and the rich minority! A young worker who makes 3000 [RMB] a month can work an entire lifetime and still not afford to buy an ordinary apartment/home!!!


This is exactly what China is like, swearing up and down that something will be done but when the time comes, not a single thing is accomplished. Every time they regulate and adjust, prices just get higher and higher, ultimately a failure.


Avaricious to a shameless degree. Experts lying through their teeth. All thinking the ordinary common people are fools. Ordinary workers can work 10 lives and still not afford to buy a home.


Real estate prices as a matter of fact is something property developers and the ZF collude on to cheat the ordinary common people of their money!


The marketization and commercialization of real estate is simply a new method of squeezing money out of the ordinary common people, so everyone is a slave to debt. The country now has money, yet the ordinary common people are in an abyss of suffering. Everything being marketized causes everyone to become unscrupulous in order to make money, with morality in decline, and everyone for themselves.


The moment prices drop, the entire country’s housing market will collapse. The Chinese who have houses all want prices to rise, only those of us ordinary common people who don’t have houses want prices to fall. Sigh… but no matter how much it drops, we still can’t afford it.


Precisely the opposite [of what was intended], prices just continued rising.


If people were actually held accountable and could be removed from office, then you’ll see whether or not they’ll do anything [effective about bringing down housing prices]! Remove some people and then they’ll be honest [actually do their jobs/fulfill their promises]!


Wuhan housing prices are over 20% higher than they were at the same time last year. Housing prices dropping is just a joke meant to deceive the poor, those who believe it simply have suffered yet another April Fool’s Day, and its not just an April Fool’s Day, but an April Fool’s Year, having been made a fool for a year.


There are policies up top [from the central government], and countermeasures below [from the local government].

What are current average housing property prices in your area (inside and outside of China)?

  • linette


    • Jeff

      You only got the love seat. Buy I’ll toss you an ottoman for your feet

      • Allen

        Reading these comments, I thought you guys had FINALLY quit all that sofa nonsense. Then , , I’ll be danged, , here that sofa comes up at the end, , instead of at the beginning. What’s with that?? ha ha ha ha ha ha!!

        • Jeff

          back of the bus sofa?

          • mr. wiener

            Watch it with that “back of the bus” stuff, or you’ll earn a swift diatribe from Nanny Hiccups.

        • Patrick

          Like it or not, the sofa is the place to be. Admit it, you want the sofa, deep down you yearn to experience its cushy ways. You just haven’t had the opportunity to sit around aimlessly for several hours hitting the refresh button from the main page to rush to the newly created article, click on it, read none of the story and scream “SOFA”, only to find you were late posting by 10 seconds and the story just happens to be about something serious and depressing so you also look like a total heartless ass. Come on, admit it, you want it, you want it bad.

  • Jeff

    I can’t afford a sofa – in China or the USA

    • Dan

      I already own 2 sofas here and am in the market for #3

  • GhettoBoy

    China needs Real Estate Taxes (not government policy expert here; but i’m sure those money can be put to good use). The cost of holding onto real estate asset in China is minimal compare to the Western societies, so one can hoard them until the end of time, reducing supply.

    • moop

      there are 64 million empty homes in china, there is an over-supply. people will still continue to hoard homes because there arent a lot of investment options for most chinese citizens. more real estate taxes would more likely be passed on to renters.

      • mr. wiener

        Christ on a bike, what’s going to happen when this shit storm hits? Don’t want to be a doom and gloom type wailing about the sky falling ,but what happens when the bubble burst? Could this be worse than what happened in the states?
        I don’t understand enough of this stuff. I’ll just get ready to retire to the country side and raise silkworms.

        • moop

          haha, it really depends on who you ask. some people seem to think that china is special an basically the market’s rules dont really apply. but if you look at what people who predicted the financial crisis are saying and writing, a lot of them seem to say it will be worse. because unlike the US’s bubble, china’s bubble is in real estate both commercial and private, as well as in construction. also, on a provincial level, toxic debt is pretty damn high already and china’s government prints a lot more money that most people think. those in australia and canada would be hit harder than most places by a china bubble bursting, as they are experiencing rising housing prices as well and are very much tied in with construction commodities from china

          • mr. wiener

            Shit-a-brick that article is not making me feel better.

            “We’ll all be rooned said Hanrahan”.

          • Hongjian

            China is indeed different to the western rules of the market. In China, there is despite all bubbles and speculations and so-claimed “overcapacities”, still a huge demographic pressure which translates into a colossal demand, which wont be satisfied in half a century, even if all regulations would actually work out.

            China isnt like thew PIIGS, especially Spain, that was forced into their knees by a real-estate bubble due to the real lack of demand. China isnt the US where most real-estate purchases are done by credit alone – home buyers in China typically put down at least 40% of their purchase price – not like in the US where it is made of 99% loans. In China, there are no actual over-capacities, but an under-supply and over-demand on everything. The problem is just, that those who demand all the ressources the most, receive nothing, while those who already have a lot, grow fatter and receive more all the time.


            ^good read, though dated 2011. Many facts still hold true, though.

          • moop

            china is not immune to the market, the economic downturn they are staring down is proof of that. there is no undersupply. demand has not exceeded supply. the prices are too high for this to happen. houses would have to be selling at below market value for that to likely happen. there are no housing shortages.
            china’s bubble is not simply real estate. a large part of it is in construction driven by provicial governments who are running up massive toxic debts. that article is failry useless. several assumptions like the one about policies in chongqing have already proven to be relatively impotent. the chinese government has proven incapable of really controlling housing prices, and the more they try, the more they inflate the bubble up.

          • hess

            hj is a retard who doesnt know shit about anything, i guess we all figured that out by now though.

          • Hongjian

            “there is no undersupply. demand has not exceeded supply. the prices are too high for this to happen.”

            There is a huge undersupply, because of the high and unrealistic prices and the fact that privately owned housings are an important social status symbol which decides over people’s marriages. And there is also a real undersupply because of the sheer number of people who demand housings, even if the prices fell to “below the market price”. 64 million houses are nothing for all the real demand existing.
            Also, what is actually “under the market value” in a market whose prices are stroked mostly by speculation? Is there any indication of what the actual housing prices are for lots of government sponsored social housings, before they got speculated to crap? Of course, nothing will be solved painlessly. In the long run, the govt. must let the speculation bubble burst, even if this would ruin all those people who invested their entire money into dozens of houses to counter inflation. But since the housings are mostly purchased with down-payment, only the people who invested in them will suffer, less so the Banks (who are generally reluctant to lend to non-government owned entities in the first place).
            And the issue with the provincial debt, resulting from the huge investment boom with all its inefficient and failed allocations isnt a new thing at all, and it wont cause any larger problems. Again, I cite the overall developmental level of China’s provinces here as a driving force that actually needs all those investments. The whole of western China still needs to be developed, and thus needs investments to accomplish that – the USA and much of Western Europe do not have this pent-up demand of development anymore since one hundred years before. State banks having lots of toxic debts is nothing special in this case and in such an era. Considering that Chinese state-banks arent exactly unhealthy (after all they are getting too much and too easy profit due to their soon-to-be-changed monopoly status), they can soak off much of the debts. Also, because the govt controls the banks and not vice versa, ordering them to have a very high equity capital giving them a high liquidity, withstanding shocks due to economic downturns and bad loans arent a big problem to them.

            As the following article said: China is unfair, but not unstable.


            But whatever. We shall see. Gordon Changs are crying about the bursting of the China bubble for decades, due to their ideologically coloured wish to see China fail. But till now, it is only these people who failed.

          • moop

            the economist is a keynesist rag that pushes the same kinds of policies that helped cause the economic slowdown to begin with. china is a keynesist wet dream, and if china fails, so do they. their answer is still more government spending to stimulate growth similar to their previous forays at the beginning of the financial crisis. that too has already been proven to be a failure. with all the lessons learned in the past 70 years, people are still pushing for this keynsist bullshit. its a macroeconomic fantasy that china can somehow avoid a large economic bubble. the only people saying otherwise are keynsists ans people with skin in the game. i dont really give a shit aobut gordon chang, his bias is obvious, but what i do notice is that a lot of the same people who were right before and have been right in the 20th and so far in the 21st century. mainstream economists pretty much all missed the mark. at most they called a housing bubble in the states, but practically none of them forsaw the crisis and their responses have also failed in kind. why people continue to believe them and put stock in what they say and quote them is beyond me.

        • donscarletti

          Well, I’m going to buy a nice big new apartment when that happens for one.

      • GhettoBoy

        You can only pass the cost to renters if you RENT it, and not letting it stay vacant.

        • moop

          yeah, so? you think a majority of purchased homes just sit empty? did you ever think that highers taxes might discourage buyers from buying? more owners would try to rent their places out if taxes increased so they could recoup some of the money.

      • donscarletti

        As far as current price-to-rent ratios (~1/50) are concerned, I would call rent in Beijing “nominal” if that, pretty much only instituted because renters make less of a mess than squatters.
        Rent is this low compared to prices because that is what renters can afford, not because of anything to do with the price of the house, interest, wear and tear, government taxes and duties, etc. Any increase in tax will have to be borne by owners because there is nobody else willing to pay it.

      • Hongjian

        “64 million empty homes in china, there is an over-supply.”

        Actually it is not an over-supply. It is still an severe under-supply, considering all the people who are still without housings, because every newly built government subsidized “affordable housing” gets speculated on before they are even built by local govt., rich faggots and people seeking for investment objects to protect against inflation.
        The over-supply only exists to those who can afford 20 homes as speculation/investment objects – not to those who are still without any homes. People who can afford several homes in China never buy them for like living in them or renting them out: They buy them as an account book replacement, that will actually give them decent interest rates to stem against the natural inflation of a fast growing economy. But is the wrong way to do that by hoarding homes, creating entire ghost cities (cities that are representing collective account books of an entire social class – who’d dare to take that away from them?) while millions of lower income people still cant have one single home.

        As I always said, it is very unnatural for any nation to have so many people actually purchasing homes, while renting them is so under-used. The western nations, the majority do not own homes, but only rent them. But this can only happen, if there are actual enforced laws that protect the renting people from arbitrary rent-hikes that would scare them off and force them to purchase homes for their own security at all costs – which does not exist in China. At least not in the enforced manner.
        Noone gives a shit about laws and regulations in China anyway – considering China is an authoritarian autocracy, it is pretty mind-boggling btw. And this is the core problem behind all Chinese social and political issues – noone abides the law.

        When a vacancy tax and a law against arbitrary rent-hikes are implemented and actually enforced (by summary public executions of violators if necessary), all this housing bubble talk will only be inane shit.

        • Patrick

          Oddly enough I have to admit, I like the idea. Doesn’t matter sooner or later people will get too greedy and there will be bloodshed.

        • moop

          “The western nations, the majority do not own homes, but only rent them.”

          • Hongjian

            Ok, I should have specified myself a bit further.

            Home ownership of people about the age of those Chinese workers and recently graduated college students, whose marriage chances are directly related to whether they have any houses or not.
            At least in Europe, the average 20 something college graduate or the 30 something white collar worker isnt expected to have a 100m² flat. In China, it is, because rented homes provide zero security due to the lack of enforced laws.

        • Ruaraidh

          It’s still an oversupply though. The point is if the price ever adjusts towards making those ‘account book’ houses attainable to those who need them, the bottom will fall out of the housing market and take the building industry with it. The economic effect of the market rapidly adjusting in such a way, as it often does in such cases, would probably be catastrophic. The cycle has to come to an end, it’s inevitable, and I highly doubt the government will be able to deflate the bubble in a slow controlled manner before it does.

          • Hongjian

            Yes, as long as structural weaknesses and the overall primitivity of China’s financial system exist, the underlaying causes of the bubble and the speculation cant be solved at all.
            It is telling that people in China will answer you upon the question why they just wont invest their savings into other things than inane amounts of “account-book housings”, taking them away from people who are actually really in need of them, that there is simply no other choice than that.
            The internationally isolated stock market is the worst place to invest one’s savings, due to its total disregard of any healthy minded laws and the resulting ‘horse-race’ character which only fits gamblers and not those who wish for financial security. The other option of investing into raw materials and metals like gold and silver is damn stupid and resulted already in a huge price crash. Idiots investing into jade, leek, chinese cabbage and garlic also experienced their well-deserved crash. Last but not least the banks are giving a too low interest, which cannot counter the inflationary pressure.
            So, in the end, the only possible choice is to use the money before it becomes worthless due to the inflation on housings. Not one of them, but dozens, which itself will lead to a bubble that will definitely end their usefulness as “secure investment object” over short and long, just as the clove of garlic was when it crashed after insane speculation. And if that happens, all those “real estate account books” are also rendered as useless, if there wasnt the huge real non-speculative demand for them that is characteristical of the Chinese society and economy.

            So, to solve this problem, China needs to develop their financial system, providing more options for people to invest their savings in a more diversified and secure way to stem against inevitable inflation. Because the inflation is and will be unstoppable, since it is a natural by-product of economic growth.

          • mr. wiener

            Thanks to all ,particularly Moop and Hongjian for your insights on this. I’m still ignorant , but not as ignorant as I was before. I think I’ll take the cautious peasant approach myself. Pay off the morgage on what property I have [I bought back during the SARS outbreak when prices took a nose dive] and look to invest money in new equipment for the future. Keep it low risk , take it slow and not have any grandeos dreams of sausage empires :)

          • moop

            i’m not sure how much you are into investing, but with the heatwave in the US leading to a smaller corn yield this year and the US being the largest corn exporter in the world, you can expect to see some food prices rise in the next year, especially here in china

  • Somethin Somethin

    “Adjustments have failed yet again. Without real estate taxes and vacancy taxes, and so long as the country is not networked and government official don’t make public their real estate holdings, everything else is just bullshit! Government regulation has gotten weak yet again.”

    I’m sad my characters aren’t good enough to read this. I’ve been saying this for years.

    • lonetrey

      I don’t really know much about how politics, rules, and housing markets work. But what that chinese netizen said made sense to me. If I had to guess, this idea seems like a good one. =/

  • welcome to china….worlds biggest second economy and yet people scratch badly to survive…to me i don’t really see any future there…the rich prey on the poor and weak…..

  • Foreign Devil

    Is the government so weak that it can’t regulate it’s own country? Or is it that the this is all just lip service and they don’t actually want to stop real estate prices from climbing?

    • i’m not trying to be rude, but are you new here?

      The vast majority of householders are party members.


      • Canadian_Skies

        Many well-to-do Chinese that I met owned several homes which were left barren and unused. A Chinese English teacher at the school I worked at was showing me how to get a bus pass one day. We stopped to pick up something for her father at an empty apartment. It was immaculate. It had pictures of her and her family in it, and had an exquisite marble floor. After leaving, she strongly asked me not to tell anyone at our school about her home. I asked, and got nothing, but asked again during a meal, and found that her family had many homes like that one. Weird.

        • eric

          Is she young and beautiful? That house could be one bought for her by her sugar daddy and doesn’t want other people to find out about her second life.

      • Patrick

        Gee whiz, you mean that the party members would break the rules of a harmonious society just to benefit themselves? Oh my gosh, it’s inconceivable that people could be so greedy.

        • funny you should say that….

          • Alejandro

            my sarcasmmeter has already blown up, how about yours?

          • mr. wiener

            I’m using it in the kitchen as a fan.

  • Orthodox

    Things will get very bad, very fast if the housing market rebounds. As the top commenter noted, it will mean a government failure. Housing is used to hedge against inflation and if it takes off, it will be a signal to everyone that high inflation is here.

    Right now the economy is slowing. The Chinese economy is a giant credit bubble and the bubble turned subprime around 2010. There’s a surge in vendor financing, similar to what became widespread in the Internet bubble, where companies bypass the banks and sell their own products to customers on credit. They book it as sales and profits now, and it blows up later when the buyer goes bust. But instead of routers, Chinese companies are selling cement mixers. And the company that buys the extra cement mixers, on credit, then uses them as collateral for a bank loan.

    I would bet the housing market does turn down, just because there’s so many forces working against it, including the global economic slowdown. But if the housing market does take off, the government will have no credibility. Prices won’t rise a little, they will rise a lot, that will quickly turn into high inflation and that will lead to a devaluing currency. Traders have been devaluing the yuan this year and the PBOC has been pushing back, but it could turn into a currency crisis if the situation gets out of hand. China’s dollar reserves are needed to back the currency and if Chinese and foreigners start swapping rmb for usd, it will mean they need to raise interest rates and deflate the money supply. If they don’t do that, the value of the yuan will collapse.

  • nereis

    I’d like to see some numbers thrown around.

    I’d also like to see them in real terms (say, in 2005 RMB).

    This article contradicts most information on construction numbers and inventory backlogs I’ve been seeing.

    • kou bei dave

      yeah, I totally agree

      in my area of beijing the prices have remained relatively stable over the last two years

      but inflation has been quite high over the same period

      so, in real terms, the prices have definitely gone down

  • Li RuiKe

    The foxes are in charge of taking care of the chickens.
    Please help as many chickens as possible to escape.
    Overseas schools, universities, businesses, and governments:
    Please make it easier for good Chinese people to come to you.

    • Hongjian

      The chickens are the culprits themselves.

      Dont think that a chicken wouldnt become a fox in China, if he ever gets onto that position that provides him power to do so.

      And even without being on that position, the chinese chicken will still corrupt their surroundings like nothing else. Dont think that there isnt a fox sleeping within every chicken’s heart.

      • Nanny Hiccups

        Ummm Hongjian, your postings used to be very pro-chinese. What happened?

        • Nick in Beijing

          “Ummm Hongjian, your postings used to be very pro-chinese. What happened?”

          He looked out the window.

        • Hongjian

          I’m usually pro-China, because tons of stupid western faggots who know shit about that country and are only good at whining and crying the usual buzzwords like “freedom”, “democracy”, “human rights”, and are considering “western liberalism” the best shit ever, without even knowing the real fundamental reasons for chinese societal and political issues annoy the fuck out of me.

          And also, lots of chinese posters featured in the articles on Chinasmack are those stinking Hanhan wannabe’s and so-called “public intellectuals”, who too only know shit about the real situation due to their own very limited view (never traveled abroad) and their inane grass-is-greener mentality that is characteristical to people from commie autocracies.
          About the mentioned “public intellectual” that are so predominant here:

          But this doesnt mean that I’m blind to the inherent problems of the society and the people themselves, that are just another reason for the problems of the system itself.
          I’m used to the German proverb that all people actually deserve the govt. they are subject to – no whining allowed, since they are to blame for it themselves. So, blaming the Chinese people and not only the govt. for the problem of the country isnt something that violates my usual notions.

  • Cleo

    So by repeatedly inflating housing prices, people with disposable income are essentially being manipulated into investing in China by buying up flats with the hopes of future income property or profit from sale. And China gets to employ its unskilled workforce.

    How is that not a scam?

  • Wayne

    If the housing prices drop in the major cities like Beijing or Shanghai there would be such a flood of wai di ren wanting to buy houses and move their that the new demand would just drive them right back up. For the most part, the economy should determine housing prices, but the government could pass a law limiting the number of houses folks can buy.

  • WerkinTianjin

    People here seem to forget or not know that all those rich Chinese folks generally cannot invest easily abroad (government regs) and the Chinese stock market is a mess and untrustworthy. Buying up 2nd and 3rd houses is the easiest investment they can make and as long as the price increase beats inflation then they are coming out ahead.

    When my wife sold her apartment down south at a substantial profit she was unable to invest that money into anything overseas. But the bank (HSBC) would open an account for me using my wife’s funds and let me invest all over the place which I did and invested nothing inside China.

    Real estate taxes would help the situation but in a limited way because when rich people have enough to buy 3 and 4 houses they don’t care about the paltry amount the government would charge them per year. And real estate taxes would probably hurt the younger workers who cannot even afford a house now much less pay the real estate taxes on it.

    • Hongjian

      This is actually quite sad.

      The fact that the real-estate and especially the housing market gets speculated on so madly, is because this market was considered to be especially stable due to its inherent non-speculative demand, a virtue that comes from China’s sheer population size. So, with this kind of inherent stability in mind, speculators and investors alike are rushing into that market, destroying its stability and creating bubbles, ruining everyone else’s lives – because they know that the bubble will never burst as mad as others, since there will be still enough people in China willing to purchase housings.

      All of that, because there is so few other options left to invest one’s money to counter the inherent inflation of economic growth.

      • Kong

        The bubble doesn’t burst because there aren’t enough people to buy houses, it’s because there aren’t enough people who can *afford* to buy them, causing the bank/owner to lose money on the investment. Currently, China’s local governments are paying debt off with debt because the properties they are selling to be developed are not being developed for use. By people. They are being developed to be sold and traded. The bubble hasn’t blown because no one wants to admit that they have lost all their money yet.

        • Xiongmao

          Technically a bubble ruptures :)

  • Nanny Hiccups

    The problem here is the same as it is in Western countries. Which is making a commodity of things humans need for survival. Health care, housing, energy and the creation of debt as a commodity – if humans could meet their basic needs without struggle then there would be more money to spend on commodities corporations can actually profit from. However, when citizens are forced their focus on being able to meet their basic it leaves the rest of the economy unable to flourish. What governments should do is isolate certain markets – creating a “non-profit” economy and the prices at the absolute mininum and focus on fueling the economy for other markets where the prices can have some inflation without destroying the economy.

    This of course, is avoided because they wealthy are creating a society where citizens are completely dependent on their livelihood. It’s completely self-serving, this “trickle-down” theory. Society works best when money trickles “up”.

    • kaka

      * The problem here is the same as it is in Western countries. Which is making a commodity of things humans need for survival. Health care, housing, energy and the creation of debt as a commodity…

      This is not a “western” thing, designed by evil capitalists to exploit the “hard-working man” – this has existed since the first caveman didn’t want to die of starvation and cold, so was forced to barter with another caveman.

      Besides, who do you think owns and runs the healthcare system, the land, the energy companies, and banks in China? Funnily enough, technically it’s “the people”. The Party runs it on their behalf, because they’re nice like that… The party being the organisation that ushered in the same sort of socialist utopian nightmare you’re proposing – and look how that turned out… You can change the system all you like, but you can’t change the fundamental truth of human nature…

      * if humans could meet their basic needs without struggle then there would be more money to spend on commodities corporations can actually profit from.

      History would suggests otherwise. . .

      * What governments should do is isolate certain markets – creating a “non-profit” economy and the prices at the absolute mininum and focus on fueling the economy for other markets where the prices can have some inflation without destroying the economy.

      The gov’t has failed to control the economy, even in a state where the gov’t can and does actually control the economy, so the best idea to solve this is to give them even more control over the economy? Or were you thinking of finding some more “purely altruistic” cadres and allow them to prove the notion that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

      * This of course, is avoided because they wealthy are creating a society where citizens are completely dependent on their livelihood.

      I’m beginning to be persuaded now – perhaps if we redistributed wealth equally amongst the entire population, then for one generation we can all have everything we need. Then, once that’s been wasted, our kids can go live in a cave in the forest, because there’s no incentive to do anything any more, because there’s no differentiation of reward.

      * It’s completely self-serving, this “trickle-down” theory. Society works best when money trickles “up”.

      Yes, it does – in economies and countries that weren’t gutted economically, culturally, and academically on the ideological whim of a syphilitic farmer. Sadly for China, trickle-down is the only option.

      • Nanny Hiccups

        *History would suggests otherwise. . .

        In what way? You know what history suggests? When America went through the great depression, Eisenhower created “welfare” programs to fuel the economy lifting the entire country out of despair. When money was given to the people, there was money to spend in the market. When money was being spent, employees were hired and so the money trickled up, allowing companies to hire more employees – and all of this started with America’s first social programs. That’s how we fix the economy. You can’t strangle someone’s wallet and expect them to have money to spend on other things that create jobs.

        All of your other points don’t seem to fit my comments, even the ones you quoted. I don’t think you understood my comment clearly enough.

        • moop

          ” Eisenhower created “welfare” programs” you mean FDR?
          “allowing companies to hire more employees” no, that didnt happen. the re-hiring of workers was impeded by the institution of minimum wage laws in 1938. america recovered IN SPITE OF the new deal, not because of it.


          Hi Nanny,

          Are you referring to the WPA (Works Progress Administration) during the depression established under FDR’s administration?

          This funded programs that created jobs at a time when jobs were hard to come by – Not only did these folks build a lot of the infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc), but they also employed actors, musicians and other artists that would travel around the USA exposing people to various forms of art/culture they might not get the opportunity to experience.

          It can be argued that those efforts provided many positives immediately and for decades after.


    • Andao

      “What governments should do is isolate certain markets”

      Once you start deciding what’s considered necessary for survival, there’s no way to stop.

      • moop

        yeah, when governments start picking winners and losers, everyone loses inthe end

        • “yeah, when governments start picking winners and losers, everyone loses inthe end”

          According to neo-liberal ideology, yes. In practice, it’s not so simple, governments often make very good choices when they have to pick winners and losers, more so than the markets. South Korea and Japan’s economic growth originally derived from their governments picking winners and losers in a way which according to standard neo-liberal theories could not possibly result in economic growth.

          • moop

            yeah and how did that work out? stagnate growth? in the long-term the costs always outweigh the benefits because capital and resources get misallocated. but if you’re like to defend fascism then go ahead

    • Angry Black Man

      Genius comment and idea. Mind if I facebook it?

  • Buying a home in China = a lease… The leases will last longer than the buildings they are in… A state run con job. What are these people thinking?

    I want to buy land. Buy four or five farm houses and fields. Tear down the crap. Put up a fence and a “Trespassers will be Shot” sign. Now you’re cooking with gas!

    • Dan

      Buying a home in the US = renting. Still gotta pay property taxes every year or you lose it.

      • Snarl

        There are advantages and disadvantages to leasehold tenure vs. freehold tenure. And unless have your own private island, and can defend it, then you don’t really have sovereign rights to land under any government in the world.

        • B-real

          bingbingbingbingbing only half true. Big subtle difference between the 2. On my leased land I have MORE rights and freedom to build, farm, or what ever the zoning laws will permit. As long as I pay my taxes which I can get breaks on is mine to keep for as long as me or my family wants. I don’t worry about forced evictions public or private redevelopment unless they are of my CHOICE. I don’t have to worry about Chipping into a refurbishment fund to re-paint my condo, security payments, yearly compound upkeep, God forbid parking fee if I have more than 1 car. With the current housing market I can get it Cheap and knock it down and build a newer house Cheaper. All under the protection of my civil, state, and federal agencies paid for thru taxes.

      • moop

        wrong. property taxes are not at the federal level. they are enforced on the state or local level. there are actually some places in america that still have homesteading programs where land is free to those who build a house on it.

        • Dan

          Behind by $400 on your taxes/utilities/whatever… for that home you “own” outright? Sorry, but your $150,000 home can be seized, sold to a private company for $800 and then immediately resold for the full amount and you get nothing.

          Yea, you don’t own anything.

          • moop

            i assume you are unfamiliar with cash?

          • moop

            i assume you are talking about that yahoo article. thats only happening in some states. again, you are wrong because you are insinuating that federal policy and law means that you dont own your home. that is incorrect. individual states are to blame for this problem as well as local laws, not federal policy

        • bert

          Is there any state that has no property tax? I know some have very low property taxes but any with none?

          Found this.

          Dewey Beach, Delaware. No property taxes since 1981.

          Safford, Texas and
          Hales location, New Hampshire

          There are a few places of freedom left.

  • Dan

    Prices have most certainly been coming down by the way. It’s actually been quite effective. Obviously, the most desirable locations will NOT be coming down in any significant degree, that’s just common sense.

  • kodi

    HAHAHA what do they think they are, “GOD!” Do you have any idea who would suffer the greatest losses if the housing prices go down? Government officials and big bosses who provide kickbacks to government officials DUH……….. What did you think they would do with a policy to cool off the market? What a bunch of incompetent idiots! Watching the mistakes of the party in China is like watching retards try to write a computer program through trial and error.