Criticizing 7 Percent Is Frivolous for the Western Media To Do

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 18 July 2015
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Joe Matthews. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
Many mainstream Western media institutions have questioned the validity of China’s reported figure for its gross domestic product in the second quarter of 2015. They have also called into question the purposely “forged accounts”* by the National Bureau of Statistics of China, saying that the purpose of forging these numbers is merely to sustain investors’ confidence. Their reasoning is mainly based on the fact that Chinese first- and second-quarter growth is exactly the same, and that they hit the Chinese national target exactly – which is “just too coincidental.”

Because of this “coincidence,” the West is questioning China’s “forged accounts.”* This logic is not rigorous and can simply be called frivolous. It shows the West’s displeasure with China’s stated numbers. The West cannot cover up its hopes that Chinese growth will decrease, and these actions by the Western media have disappointed many people.

Collecting data for the Chinese economy is a huge challenge; getting the exact data with high accuracy is difficult. If there are a number of Western figureheads who question the method of data collection in China, then that isn’t strange. However, China’s statistics have consistency, and a debate over the method of collection doesn’t affect the authority of the estimations of Chinese statistics.

The temptation for the data of the NBSC to support the work of the government has existed all along. However, this temptation exists in all countries, not just China. The Chinese central leadership has worked to counter this temptation, and the NBSC has sought to maintain objectivity all along. For any person to create forged data or accounts, or use the authority of the NBSC to create fake data, would be criminal activity.

Foreign observers strongly expect that the Chinese government influences the data of the NBSC. This expectation about its ability and ease to exert such influence is a misunderstanding of the workings of the Chinese government.

Besides, although Chinese GDP growth has dropped to its lowest point in recent years, it can’t be said that this is true for all points within the economy. Because the reduction in growth has been small, signs of stabilization are already appearing. Second, society and public opinion have already adapted to the standard of the former GDP growth. Slightly slower growth, for example around 6 percent, is acceptable. Between a growth number of less than 7 percent and a fake number of 7 percent, the latter poses a larger risk to society, and China has no motivation to take this risk.

The NBSC has published numerous years worth of either “ideal” or “not ideal” data. At the same time, the political environment of China has stayed the same. If there has been any change, it is the anti-corruption campaign, which has actually increased the responsibility of public officials. If officials are acting improperly, it is “not a matter of not reporting, but a matter of when.”* Those who assert that the NBSC data are easier to fake in current times are simply reaching an incorrect conclusion.

This suspicion of “coincidental numbers” and “forged accounts” is unprofessional and similar to the cynical comments on the Internet. “China says 7 percent, so the NBSC says 7 percent”* is the kind of complaint found on the Internet. In fact, the national target for GDP growth is not 7 percent, but actually “around 7 percent.”* Since the third and fourth quarter numbers are projected to be higher, this means the total annual growth could end up slightly above 7 percent.

Of course, if the world believes that the coincidental numbers are reason for doubt, then this shows that faith and confidence in the Chinese government are not high. However, if this is the reason for doubt, why isn’t there similar suspicion about other countries where there is a lack of trust in the government?

It is necessary to point out that there are always differences between the Chinese government and Western observers about how to evaluate the Chinese economy. However, looking at these past few years, we cannot help but say that Western observers have misread Chinese economic trends. For those who like to reach unreasonable conclusions about the Chinese economy, especially those who make accusations about forged numbers, it may be worthwhile for them to have longer memories and be more objective.

*Editor's note: Correctly translated, these quotes could not be verified.


多家西方主流新闻机构质疑中国二季度GDP增长7.0%数据的真实性,并且怀疑中国国家统计局故意“造假账”,目的是为了提升投资者的信心。它们的理由几乎只有一个,那就是中国二季度和一季度的增长率完全一样,都是7.0%。而中国今年的增长目标又是7%,“这太巧了”。

  因为“巧”而质疑中国“造假账”,这一逻辑太不严谨,简直可以称之为轻佻。而且直接指着中国的鼻子表达对这一数据的不悦,都不掩饰很希望中国的经济增长更低些,西方大媒体的这种表现让人失望。

统计中国的经济数据是一项挑战性蛮大的工作,做到十分精准的确挺难的,一些西方人士如果对中国的统计方法存有争议,也不奇怪。但中国的统计是连续性的,方法之争并不影响中方数据的权威性。

让国家统计局的数字“配合”政府的工作,这样的诱惑恐怕从来都存在。同样的诱惑存在于世界各地。然而中国在中央层面早就战胜了这种诱惑,国家统计局如实、客观开展工作已经由《统计法》做出保障,任何人指使统计局造假,或者统计局为迎合权力的意愿故意制造虚假数字,都是犯罪行为。

外界一些人以为中国政府有影响国家统计局工作的强烈愿望,并且能够很轻易地施加这种影响,这是对中国政府内部运行实际情形的误解。

此外,虽说中国GDP增速降到了近年来的最低点,但现在不能说是整个经济形势最困难的时候。一是因为增速的降幅已经缩得很小,企稳回暖的迹象已经出现。二是社会和舆论已经适应了当前的GDP增速水平,对更低一些的增速,比如说六点几个百分点也是能够承受的。一个低于7.0%的数据和一个为了7.0%的造假行为,后者的社会风险现在要明显大得多,中国没有承担这种风险的动机。

国家统计局这些年公布过无数对当时中国“理想的”或者“不理想的”经济数据,国家统计局所处的政治环境一直差不多,如果说现在有什么变化,那就是反腐败增加了所有官员的责任意识,只要做了坏事,“不是不报,时候未到”。断言今天国家统计局比在这之前更容易走向数据造假,这种结论是缺乏基础的。

  给“巧合的数字”扣“造假”的帽子,这是很不专业的质疑,其所对应的水平几乎同网络愤青无异。“国家说7%,统计局出来的就是7.0%”,这多像互联网上的牢骚话。国家提出的目标不是7.0%,而是“7%左右”。由于第三第四季度的趋势被预估高于7.0%,这意味着全年的数据很有可能也非7.0%,而是会高于它。

  当然,外界因为数据稍有巧合就对中国官方的诚信产生怀疑,这也说明中国官方的公信力不够牢固,它在一些本不该发生诚信质疑的地方仍面临着自证清白的压力。

然而需要指出,西方舆论同中国政府经常在描述中国经济时发生分歧,但回顾这些年的情况,不能不说,西方舆论看错、误读中国经济形势的情况占了绝大多数。那些喜欢对中国经济乱下结论,尤其是动不动就怀疑中国经济数据“造假”的西方人士该长些记性了。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Topics

Poland: Meloni in the White House. Has Trump Forgotten Poland?*

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

Mauritius: Could Trump Be Leading the World into Recession?

India: World in Flux: India Must See Bigger Trade Picture

Palestine: US vs. Ansarallah: Will Trump Launch a Ground War in Yemen for Israel?

Ukraine: Trump Faces Uneasy Choices on Russia’s War as His ‘Compromise Strategy’ Is Failing

Related Articles

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Hong Kong: Can US Tariffs Targeting Hong Kong’s ‘Very Survival’ Really Choke the Life out of It?

Cuba: Trump, Panama and the Canal

China: White House Peddling Snake Oil as Medicine

China: Prime Take: How Do Americans View US Tariff Hikes?