{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreiggqkewj3zimijzj2ozwvhhzpvvwyyno2ahbbexrrfucrslcddyke",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:myxuvgppel3evh63qbywch4d/app.bsky.feed.post/3mneeea2gkv22"
  },
  "coverImage": {
    "$type": "blob",
    "ref": {
      "$link": "bafkreig7p7dq2ykgu5qqde4hhnaiyhpxdpxldhuzxbgckkbvz7efywakgu"
    },
    "mimeType": "image/png",
    "size": 1568359
  },
  "path": "/p/strategic-stability-structural-strain",
  "publishedAt": "2026-06-02T11:45:33.000Z",
  "site": "https://sinocism.com",
  "textContent": "US-China | Global Order | East Asia | Europe | Middle East & Pakistan | Chinese Economy | Research and Education | Tech & AI The clearest fault line in the economics debate is between proponents of infrastructure-led stimulus and advocates of consumption-based stimulus. Yu Yongding, who views the post-2008 financial crisis fixed-asset stimulus as a broadly positive model, approves of signs that the Fifteenth Five-Year Plan period is set to allocate substantial funds for infrastructure outlay. On the other side, Li Xunlei argues that counter-cyclical stimulus of this kind would only deepen imbalances, while Liu Shijin suggests that money for infrastructure would be far better spent on increasing rural pensions, as he has previously advocated. Huang Yiping adds a further cautionary note: China’s past stimulus, he observes, has tended to generate a short-term inflationary boost but a longer-term deflationary effect, a pattern that AI adoption may further exacerbate.",
  "title": "Strategic Stability, Structural Strain | Sinification: May 2026"
}