cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/53072462
[…]
The central risk is not a sudden systemic collapse, but a drawn‑out period of sub‑par growth, weak returns on investment, and fragile confidence—a pattern that will sound familiar to students of Japan’s post‑1990 trajectory.
Several specific challenges stand out:
- Demographics: An aging, shrinking population caps housing demand and undermines the traditional link between urbanization and construction booms.
- Balance sheets: Developers, local governments, and some financial institutions face long, grinding deleveraging cycles.
- Policy trade‑offs: Stimulating housing too aggressively risks re‑inflating the bubble; tightening too hard risks tipping growth into a deeper downturn.
- Confidence: Once households lose faith in property as a one‑way wealth escalator, rebuilding sentiment can take years.
[…]



Ok tankie
So what do you not actually care about whether property ownership is meaningfully different in China vs western countries beyond its use as hostile evidence?
I care about good faith arguments, and you’re not making one.
I told you how things actually work, in both China and America, is anything that doesn’t reinforce preconceived notions bad faith to you?
You’re using the USA, a country just as shit if not worse than China when it comes to human rights to try and make China look good.
That’s the bad faith argument.
Property isn’t a human right.
America is the easiest as I am most familiar with it since I lived there. There’s no European country I am aware of that doesn’t require you pay money to continue to own property, and have the ability to force you to sell at a price they pick, if they say they have a reason.
Yes, you can argue against them in court, that’s true in China too, and there are rare cases where the state doesn’t have a legal mechanism to do so, and the highway or w/e has to be routed around the home, that’s true in China too.
Ok tankie