When he says "China's debt problems", what exactly is he referring to?
When he says "there are also only four ways that Beijing can respond", what are they responding to and what is the goal of their response?
Briefly, though: China has had artificially cheap credit in its corporate sector due to explicit government policies restricting the growth of household spending. This cheap credit caused a lot of malinvestment ("bridges to nowhere"), and there hasn't been an accounting reckoning yet.
To continue to grow, China needs its household sector to grow, both in consumption and share of the economy. This is a classic shift from middle-income to developed economy. Because right now continued growth from the corporate (generally export-driven) sector has topped out, and getting more growth out of it is costly in terms of debt.
I think those are the broad strokes. To summarize: the Beijing is responding to the explosive growth of internal debt in the economy, and the goal is to continue growing. That growth must come from the household sector, but must also include dealing with the massive debt overhang. (I suppose you could also say that Beijing's goal is to stay in power, which requires economic growth to keep the populace happy.)
China’s response to the financial crisis was to loosen credit and “encourage” banks to lend. The result was that debt started rising faster than GPD and total debt now stands at 300% of GDP.
Since GDP is the income needed to pay off debt there is a point where it is no longer sustainable. If there were no limit it would be possible to eliminate poverty by simply giving poor people loans.
> When he says "there are also only four ways that Beijing can respond", what are they responding to and what is the goal of their response?
With a looming trade war it is unlikely that China will be able to sustain the trade deficits with the US like it has in the past. It is also unlikely that China can find any other viable markets that could absorb exports that are currently destined for the US. China will want to mitigate the domestic impact of the outcome in a way that preserves domestic stability.
As for the what are they responding to is the engine for economic growth is stalling out from knock on effects behind whats going on above, and I can only speculate that the "goal" of any kind of response will be to maintain some kind of economic "stability".
[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-02/china-hea...
The second option is wealth transfer through debt default; or government forced wealth transfer (taxes or inflation). China’s debt could be brought down from 300% of GDP to 100% of GDP overnight if creditors simply forgave 2/3rds of debt. That could happen though debt default (debtor bankruptcy) or taxing creditors and giving it to debtors. Having the bulk of your life savings disappear tends to make people angry and so China will attempt to avoid that.
The last option is to kick the can down the road and increase domestic debt which is what they have been doing for the last 10 years.
Well I put "stability" in quotes because in reality, every economic actor will have their own perspective of what the goal is and how effective any solution will be in achieving such goal. Some people thought zero lower bound and real negative interest rates solved things, and others thought it was just kicking the can down the road…
My issue with the first four bullet points is that the government now can point to instances where they say that they have been doing all of those things (because all these bullet points address things at such a high level), and all this is telling them to do is just do more of the same and expect different results.