Does China need more consumption?

I am repeatedly puzzled by this claim, which you will find in Michael Pettis, Paul Krugman, and others (WSJ), even Stephen Roach.  It might make sense for short-run matters, when prices are (maybe) sticky.  But as of late we are talking about how to restructure China for medium- and long-term growth.

Investment good prices are not sticky forever!  If rates of return are too low, those prices will fall, thereby restoring higher rates of return.  Somehow I never see that point mentioned.

Note that China is not in a liquidity trap, so weird liquidity trap results are not going to apply here.  If you are worried about some kind of downward spiral of everything, monetary policy can fill the gap.

Paul Krugman for one writes (NYT):

The result is that China has a huge quantity of savings all dressed up with no good place to go.

China needs investment in lots of things, starting with say health care?  There is a major doctor shortage and the quality of Chinese health care is abysmal.  It is true that China also needs more consumption of health care, rather than production of health care with no one consuming it.  But that is not what people mean when they say China needs more consumption.

It is plausible to argue that China has inefficiency wedges that favor some kinds of investment over consumption, such as massive subsidies for infrastructure construction.  But it is odd to conclude that China needs outright “more consumption,” which indeed will limit China’s prospects for the future.  What China needs is “both more consumption and more investment in the discouraged sectors.”  That would both boost growth and the welfare of Chinese citizens.

The policy differences here are quite concrete.  Don’t expect to get far by printing up lots of money, giving it to Chinese consumers, and telling them to spend it.  You might, however, help growth rates if you could free up or otherwise assist China’s numerous dysfunctional sectors, again with health care being one very obvious example.

The WSJ wrote:

…top leader Xi Jinping has deep-rooted philosophical objections to Western-style consumption-driven growth…

C’mon people!  Can I call it “Western-style production-driven growth”?  (Where do you think most real income for consumption comes from?)  The rebellion against Say’s Law has gone way too far.