That Li, his predecessors and successors have published reliable data is pretty obvious. We now have over 40 years of their consolidated financials to compare against actual, existing China. When we do that we can readily see that, if anything, China has been understating its progress.

For more than a decade now the IMF, World Bank and OECD have had access to China’s books and they’re happy with what they see. They’re even telling China that its currency is over-valued – and being listened to.

The Economist predicted 56 of the last 0 Chinese economy crashes. China’s debt fragilities are over-stated. They don’t threaten the model. [In real life, corporate net debt is nearly zero, private savings are $3 trillion, foreign reserves $4 trillion]. The proof is in the numbers. Not just headline growth, but stable and low inflation, strong wage growth and rising tax revenue. The St Louis Federal Reserve estimate that the multiplier on Chinese government spending is two. The economy is creating surplus capital to replace that which is destroyed. Finally, there’s exports. Exports validate internal data: China is taking global market share and prices are falling even as wages and currency rise. What’s happening externally is surely happening internally. A couple of suggestive data points:

The four largest, most profitable companies on earth are Chinese SOEs.

A record 7.5 million students graduated from China’s universities this year, highlighting the employment situation among fresh graduates as the country’s economic growth slows. New graduates born in the 1990s are earning an average of 2,687 yuan (US$420) per month in their first jobs, an increase of 244 yuan (US$38) from a year ago. That’s a 9% annual increase, putting this year ahead of the curve that has doubled Chinese incomes every year for 40 years.

The most interesting questions are these:
1. Why have Western ‘experts’ ALWAYS been wrong about China’s economy?
2. Why have they not examined their methodology?
3. Why has nobody noticed this extraordinary phenomenon?
4. If we can be that wrong about such an obvious, measurable phenomenon, what else are we getting wrong about China?