Of course it does, in the way that any military spending does.
Naval Forces - Asia
- Thread starter Jade
- Start date
Grand Danois
Entertainer
I thought it was $25-30 million a pop. But $25m agrees with me.
Burden on economy is affected by RER. The US has a RER of 1; China 4.5 (iirc).
As it is burden on economy, it is not sectoral, i.e. RER should apply.
A thought experiment:
Nominal value, fly away cost of the Raptor is $116m; same for the J-20 is $25m. Converted into PPP it gives $116m for the Raptor and $112.5m for the J-10.
Producing a J-10 represents the same burden to Chinese economy as producing a Raptor does to the US.
I thought it was $880 billion or am I wrong?
Actually it is lower, but you were right as of FY06 (which was almost 2 years ago).I thought it was $880 billion or am I wrong?
The decision on Project 76 has not been made yet. The Bharat-Rakshak article on Project 76, clearly mentions that Amur may be one of the candidates.
However in one the recent news reports, Brahmos corp. CEO Dr.Pillai said they wanted to integrate sub-launched Brahmos with Amur and IN turned it down. (That's the reason Brahmos tech demonstration will be done on an IN Kilo). So as of now there is no public information on Second line of submarines for IN.
Crobato , Project 76 is IN designation for Second line of Submarines (well not official yet any way).
Yeah, I thought there was something wrong with 8 trillion dollars. I actually thought it would be higher now given the situation with Iraq and Afghanistan and all. The US has been spending huge amounts of money trying to rebuild these countries.
US government net debt is a hell of a lot more than $880 billion dollars. The total is on the US treasury website (I can't be bothered to look now), & it's closer to the previously mentioned $8 trillion than $880 billion. China alone holds almost that much US government paper.
Or if he was referring to Chinese foreign currency holdings, the $1400 billion figure is probably pretty close.
No, no! Economic burden should always be calculated in local prices, & sectoral comparisons at local prices or sectoral PPP, depending on the type of comparison. Whole-economy PPP should only be used for whole-economy comparisons, even if it actually gives much the same answer for economic burden, for fear of the false apparent equivalence that you end up with, that a J-10 is worth as much as an F-22.
BTW, that's how Mr. Tkacik calculated Chinese defence spending. His figure implicitly assumes that a J-10 & an F-22 are worth much the same. So your little thought experiment is very useful indeed for highlighting the implications of his methodology.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
I did indeed use the Tkacik approach and waited for you to comment on it.
I do understand why he is wrong when assessing defence spending compared to an entire economy, didn't see myself walking into the same trap re sectoral PPP...
RER for the Chinese aerospace industry should be somewhere between 1 and 4.5 (and probably closer to 1 than 4.5).
Yeah, sorry I was wrong the budget deficit is somewhere around a trillion dollars and according to US national debt clock the public debt is close to 9 trillion.
About their "surplus" That is their foreign currency reserves. They do NOT have a budget surplus. They have a budget defecit of less than 30 billion.
China is the second largest holder of U.S. treasury bonds after Japan.
China= $350 billion
Japan= $600 billion
About the foriegn currency reserves, that is their money to spend on what they want, isn't it. I'm asking because I'm confused as to whether that $1.3 trillion is the government's money or someone else's.
Thanks.
Last edited:
You could also idle it up by including the socio-economic impact of domestic (!) procurement.
contedicavour
New Member
Good point. There are 7 SSBNs of the Delta III class, plus 5 Victor III and 6 (tbc) Akula SSNs. Add < 5 operations Kilo. May be in bad operational shape still quite a lot of assets.
There is one Slava CG (the Kirov is deleted) and approx 10 (probably not all operational) Sovremmenny and Udaloy DDGs. Plus the 7 Krivak III of the Border Guard.
cheers
I thought it was $880 billion or am I wrong?
That is how much China holds in US treasury bonds right now.
The Chinese government also thinks that its a jobs generator, though the same can be said of the F-22. The money is only circulated within the economy, with the exception of the 3 million dollars spent on the engine, which goes to the Russians. So which is really more harmful? Hypothetically you spend $150 million on a domestic product that helps pay for domestic jobs, or spend $60 million which flies away to another country.
something is only a burden if it is spent extravagantly. If you order 60 J-10s at $20 million each, that's only $1.2 billion a year on purchasing J-10s. Not a lot, is it?
when i mention $20-25 million is cost including R&D. Think about it this way, J-10's development cost 20 billion Yuan = 2.5 billion USD. If they order 800 J-10s, that's only $3 million in the overall cost for R&D. F-22 on the other hand cost $350 million including R&D cost. Also, I believe F-22's flyaway is 125 - 135 million.
well, when you get people with agenda doing estimations, you get ridiculous figures. I love how PPP is first used by DoD to get the 3x defense budget figure. And then PPP is used again by the China threat people).
it's the gov't money, as you can see they've been spending it US treasury bond (which is possibly the lowest yielding investment in the world) and most recently blackstone IPO (which they lost huge on).
I think you'd better look at Japan who's naval forces are second only to the US in technological sophistication, probably better in some ways though I don't care to argue that point. As far as SSBN's go if the topic is what asian countries have the best ones....... well, that's easy since China is the only one with SSBN. This duzn't include Russia all or part which of course are second only to the US and superior in numbers of both. It's actually exciting reading up on what Japan is doing right now and no one seems to be paying attention. Even talking about and developing light carriers. Hutch
Incognito129
Banned Member
Well comparing PPP depends on what is specifically being compared. In this case, I seriously doubt J-10 is anywhere near the F-22 in terms of quality.
Another thing thats important is that China is using a fixed exchange rate, and they have successfully made it credible thus far. Their gargantuan trade surplus is because of this and offsets the economic burden of the ever increasing government budget.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #59
The Indian Kilos have since been upgraded - would that bring them up to or better the 636 Kilos ?
Ah. I see it. A semantic problem. You are misinterpreting the word burden. It means not only something which is difficult to support, but anything which is carried. "Economic burden" can - and in this context does - mean any cost imposed on the economy, even the lightest, most easily supportable one. It does not necessarily have connotations of excess, though it can, & clearly, that is how you have interpreted it.