this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
336 points (96.2% liked)

World News

48368 readers
3188 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Even China's population of 1.4 billion would not be enough to fill all the empty apartments littered across the country, a former official said on Saturday, in a rare public critique of the country's crisis-hit property market.

China's property sector, once the pillar of the economy, has slumped since 2021 when real estate giant China Evergrande Group (3333.HK) defaulted on its debt obligations following a clampdown on new borrowing.

Big-name developers such as Country Garden Holdings (2007.HK) continue to teeter close to default even to this day, keeping home-buyer sentiment depressed.

As of the end of August, the combined floor area of unsold homes stood at 648 million square metres (7 billion square feet), the latest data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) show.

That would be equal to 7.2 million homes, according to Reuters calculations, based on the average home size of 90 square metres.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 129 points 2 years ago (10 children)

I find it interesting that everyone is calling this bad management when it's indicating one thing above all:

Productivity has well exceeded the requirements of the population.

People simply don't need to work that hard anymore, but all industrialized societies, even would-be socialists, simply can't stand the idea of letting the working class have leisure time.

[–] somethingsnappy@lemmy.world 35 points 2 years ago (1 children)

UBI and robust social safety nets should have started with the industrial revolution. Every time a machine, computer, or now robots, UBI should have increased and been given to more people.

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

Tax the automation!! Have companies pay employee taxes for self scanners and all automation. Let the workers live, let the machines work.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago (6 children)

I look at my own country of Portugal with a massive realestate prices bubble were more than half the youths only leave their parent's home after they're 30, more than 50% of recent graduates emigrating when they get their degrees and schools in certain areas lacking teachers because houses there are too expensive for a teacher salary, and think that maybe what China has there is actually good thing, not a bad thing.

Yeah, sure, "investors" are suffering, but why should the other 99% of people care?!

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I do wonder what's going to happen to all that property as China's population hits 700,000,000 or so

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

A lot of developed countries are going to see a decrease in population starting in the next 20 years and that will probably go on until the end of this century.

Our growth-minded economics needs to shift. Maybe we need to focus on how to gracefully decline. A decrease in revenue does not mean a company is not profitable. So that mindset needs to change.

We really need to focus on geriatric care, there will be a lot more old people than young people, so we need some way to get care to all the old people without over-burdening the young. More robots? Or robot-assisted care so that is it not so taxing on a nurse? I recently had to help a neighbor who was in declining health and mind, and man, I do not want myself to be in that state burdening my children and family. So we need some legislature to allow assisted suicide for those with terminal illness so I can go and die with dignity and grace.

Then we need a new de-construction industry that is focused on removing old buildings and old infrastructure and restoring the land back to its natural state. Otherwise we will have a plague of urban decay if that's not managed well.

[–] Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Maybe if they actually built these things up to code it would take longer to build them in the first place. These things tend to collapse.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world 40 points 2 years ago (2 children)

good to know Earth resources are used in rational and sustainable manner.

[–] Astroturfed@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

The half finished apartment complexes and ones that are collapsing already because they build them with bamboo instead of cement would indicate otherwise. Look up tofu-dreg projects/buildings for a good laugh. So much of the rapid construction done in the last 20-30 years in China is going to be in landfills far before it should be....

[–] NotSpez@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It looks like you mixed up the fields for your password and username. TL;DR: you’ve got a password-looking username

Also, I agree with your comment.

[–] kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago

This is a feature, not a bug :)

[–] AlexisFR@jlai.lu 21 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Damn... Can't they disassemble them and ship them in the West?

[–] ledtasso@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

No thanks, China's infrastructure is of notoriously bad quality.

[–] TammyTobacco@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] shinratdr@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

We can exchange them for a wobbly CD rack and some of those rancid meatballs.

[–] ClassicCarPhenatic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

If you're American, the problem here actually isn't the number of residences, there are plenty of those. The problem is that developers only want to invest in single family units or high value apartments. We need policy makers who will actually tax absentee landlords and developers of high value properties to the point that local developers begin seeing more profit in creating affordable housing. In fact, affordable housing can be some of the most profitable even without increased tax burden but try convincing a group of investors that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nucleative@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

For many mainland Chinese people, real estate is the only place they can invest their money. Traditionally and culturally it's also seen as the only possible way to rise up and do better.

The money export controls make it difficult for the average guy to move his money abroad as well.

So there are many Chinese people putting retirement or family savings into these places because they don't have other options.

They have also just had a very long run of easy government backed mortgage support, making it a bit too easy to borrow money for these properties.

It's crazy and doesn't make long term sense when the number of domiciles exceeds the number of people.

[–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Can... can they move those apartments here?

[–] Rocha@lm.put.tf 6 points 2 years ago

I'm 99% sure they wouldn't pass a safety inspection.

[–] Zetta@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago

If you'd like to die from building collapse, or at the best least have your shit apartment literally falling apart in less than a few years

[–] irotsoma@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

No need, just need to force them to sell their property here along with all the other rich people who are holding on to vacant property as an investment. There are plenty of homes in most places if they'd do something like double the property tax on any property that's vacant more than a few months per year.

[–] benjhm@sopuli.xyz 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is important, not least because making the cement and steel for these surplus apartments and associated road infrastructure makes an enormous contribution to global CO~2~ emissions. Look at how the emissions took off after 2005. So the sooner the bubble bursts, the better for the climate.

[–] 1847953620@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Then they'll expend CO2 removing the abandoned structures, and building other things on top of some of that, and another bubble will be coming down the pipe sooner or later.

We need to fix the systems that let these bubbles occur in the first place

[–] benjhm@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 years ago

I recall a presentation by a key guy in China's planning system (NDRC-ERI) - it was clear that their plan all along was for the peak construction to coincide with the peak working-age population - which is why they would never concede to reduce emissions earlier. They had a long-term view including demographics (more than most governments consider), but the process got its own momentum and became the bubble - also related to city-government financing incentives as well as risky tycoons. Now the problem with such over-planning is that the next generation may not thank them for the legacy of this type of construction (and CO~2~), and prefer to live in smaller houses or away from the coast (as Shanghai, Tianjin, etc. will be flooded due to same CO~2~), hence as you say even more reconstruction (and more CO~2~). But the peak has passed, what really matters next is whether India will repeat similar mistakes.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's almost as if the idea of endless growth is a bad one...

[–] 1847953620@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

but GrOwTh

What will we ever do without gRoWtH

[–] autotldr 2 points 2 years ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


BEIJING, Sept 23 (Reuters) - Even China's population of 1.4 billion would not be enough to fill all the empty apartments littered across the country, a former official said on Saturday, in a rare public critique of the country's crisis-hit property market.

Big-name developers such as Country Garden Holdings (2007.HK) continue to teeter close to default even to this day, keeping home-buyer sentiment depressed.

As of the end of August, the combined floor area of unsold homes stood at 648 million square metres (7 billion square feet), the latest data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) show.

That does not count the numerous residential projects that have already been sold but not yet completed due to cash-flow problems, or the multiple homes purchased by speculators in the last market upturn in 2016 that remain vacant, which together make up the bulk of unused space, experts estimate.

"That estimate might be a bit much, but 1.4 billion people probably can't fill them," He said at a forum in the southern Chinese city Dongguan, according to a video released by the official media China News Service.

His negative view of the economically significant sector at a public forum stands in sharp contrast to the official narrative that the Chinese economy is "resilient".


The original article contains 346 words, the summary contains 211 words. Saved 39%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

And China's population is projected to fall under 1 billion again over the next decades, making this a shit show circus. So many apartments bought as an investment will never see any occupancy and will likely just be abandoned. They got entire empty ghost towns already

[–] cyd@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Nah. China's urbanization rate is currently 65%. South Korea for comparison has 82% urbanization rate. So the Chinese have plenty more (say, a hundred million or so more) homes to build. The current difficulties are more to do with (i) loss of consumer confidence caused by the leadership's bad economic management, and (ii) the deliberate restriction of credit to developers because of the government's concerns about debt.

This analysis reminds me of the hoo-hah about China's "ghost cities" circa 2010. Those ghost cities ended up being filled up.

[–] rbesfe@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 years ago (4 children)

There are still vast ghost cities in that country, so no they don't actually all fill up

[–] AfricanExpansionist@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sooo many empty or partially used shopping malls

[–] Sendbeer@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] AfricanExpansionist@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Haha both!

I dunno which is worse. The ones in China were never used, just built and left to rot. Many in the US had some decades of glory, then ended up with the same fate.

[–] cyd@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Enough of them filled up that even the press outlets that pushed the ghost cities narrative most aggressively, like Bloomberg, have run follow-up stories acknowledging it.

Yes, some developments worked out and others didn't, but building out housing in advance of increasing urbanization is a good thing, not a bad thing. It's how you avoid housing unaffordability in urban centers, or worse, the rise of slums.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Building housing 15 or 20 years ahead of time isn't a good thing. When people move in, the places are already old. Apartment buildings deteriorate over time even with no one living in them. It's clearly wasteful to build them that early and there's definitely a huge property bubble in China.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›