The South China Morning Post editorial:
Beijing has been much more aggressive than most economists expected... The decoupling theory of Asia's dependence on American growth has long been discredited as premature. China's stimulus package could provide an ironic footnote, if it stems a domestic slowdown and cushions a drop in developed nations' exports to China... The 4 trillion yuan package... is a reminder that China and other developing nations should play a greater role in world financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund.
Forbes.com's Tina Wong:
The whopping half-trillion-dollar stimulus package that China unveiled over the weekend is not as big as it sounds. Taking into account expenditures that were expected to take place in any case, the amount of new spending proposed by Beijing is actually a small proportion of the headline figure. The package will not be implemented fast enough or stimulate domestic consumption enough to offset the global downturn, many analysts say.
"We don't really know how large [this package] is. It does include lots of things that we already know about. It also includes a lot of things that would've happened regardless," said Eric Fishwick, a Hong Kong-based economist for CLSA.
...Only 1.5 trillion yuan ($219.6 billion) of the fiscal stimulus is truly new, with 2.5 trillion yuan ($366.2 billion) stemming from previously allocated funds, calculated Bill Belchere, Macquarie Securities' China economist.
The Washington Post article:
Jing Ulrich, managing director of China equities for J.P. Morgan, wrote in a research note Sunday that the Chinese economy is facing "the most serious economic headwinds since the Asian financial crisis" and that "the government has every political incentive to boost spending in priority programs."
"Beijing's new policy drive of upgrading infrastructure, rural land reforms, and expansion of social welfare is akin to a 'New Deal' with Chinese characteristics," Ulrich wrote.
China Herald's Fons Tuinstra:
The question seems justified: how much of the four trillion renminbi is actual window-dressing, and how much is true new investments? Is it a nice way to play the stock markets and the international political climate? I'm not yet convinced.
24/7 Wall St. blog's Douglas A. McIntyre:
China's new bailout package has been set up to make the US government look cheap. At $586 billion its ratio to GDP is impressive... If the Chinese have calculated their economic stimulus package correctly, an American equivalent would have to total at least $2.4 trillion... So far, the US government has settled on the $700 billion Paulson plan as the right amount to fix what ails the economy... If the Chinese have the right idea, the US government is going to have to come up with a sum at least four times what Paulson got on his trip up the Hill.
The Heritage Foundation's Derek Scissors:
In substance, the program is largely a repackaging of previous measures designed to immediately bolster domestic confidence and spin Chinese participation in the upcoming G-20 global financial meetings... The package is merely the culmination of a series of steps taken over the previous nine months, measures enacted first to bolster suffering domestic stocks and then to boost a sharply decelerating domestic economy.