Quote:
Originally Posted by smallpox
Right back atcha. I never insinuated that you stated he was 100% right on everything, merely that "it is true." It can refer to any amount of his argument as you intended to pass. If he is going to defy classical-liberalism, you better have a bigger argument than "He use to be prime minister of Singapore"
No, China's problems are only magnified because of its lack of democratization. India has a population of over a billion too, and it's problems aren't magnified (although, most problems in the world are magnified, I would rather say not as magnified as China).
|
I don't see why India's democratization is so great. They have problems building highways because of beaucracy. The rail system in mumbai is horrific, an average of 11 people die in a rail system everyday. The literacy rate is 61%. The difference between the ultra rich and dirt poor is huge. I've always said that democracy does not fix social issues within the country and a big country like India is no exception.
Quote:
Ah yes, the guarding terms of name calling. Canada's farming population accounts for 3% of the labour in Canada -- the US and other developed nations are not far behind. China's majority is still agrarian on all counts. Plus in many of these countries, the trade is surviving on subsidies making their benefit to the economy that much lower; increasing the price of domestic foodstuff, reducing workers productivity (work in farms is only productive during crop season) and thus driving up opportunity costs that are forgone because of these subsidies; depriving other more deserving sectors of their labour within the national economy (most likely the service sector). Agricultural economics in the developed world produces a deadweight lost on all counts of its existence and so rendering its business an economic burden rather than something that drives the economy as you seem to insinuate. I don't know how you were expecting to say I had poor knowledge of economics out of this....
Countries that have a dominant agricultural economy are known to have major issues concerning governance, economic development and technological innovation. This is purely simple economic facts supported by the economic laws I have stated prior. I don't think there's a single economist out there that would deny that the majority of employment in the developed world is in the service industry.
|
Yes it is true that China have more farmers because as they use less machines that would've relied less on farmers. But I know that in the US they relied on migrant helpers or illegal immigrants to help them harvest and package food.
Quote:
Did I say only tooth brushes? Not at all. If failing at life is sticking to economically viable plans, than inventing other's arguments must be that much of a bigger failure.
Does China still produce tooth brushes? Yes.
I'd like to see if China makes any significant contribution to Boeing productions since I know Boeing makes goods for the US Army and they have a strict made in the US only policy regarding that. Further I only used these examples to illustrate the manufacturing gap that is present between a developed economy and China -- if you can go beyond the micro example and either agree or disagree on the actual matter.
Is the entity of China really the major producers of these goods, or is it workers living in China who work under the education/training, supervision, plans, and investments of foreign companies?
China is making progresses, there's no denying that, but it's far from the example of an authoritarian alternative to development to a post-industrial society.
|
I agree with you on this one. China lacks creation of IP and brand recognition as they spend little money on advertising outside China. However, Chinese investors have to spend alot of money in developing their brand or buying others like Levono buying IBM's desktop and laptop line. However, many foreign companies are usually weary of China gobbling up their companies.
Another problem is the lack of management who understand Chinese and Western style cultures. Many people who have been to the West just didn't come back, thus the brain drain that the China's best and brightest are not working in China. I also do think China should offer more cheaper or free Education to create the educated workers of tomorrow. China has to make incentives for Chinese overseas Nationals to come back to China.
Quote:
What's with all these calls on ignorance. I am myself learning Chinese and getting a minor in the field as we speak. Again, refer to my statement immediately above to realise what I am actually arguing.
The only ignorant person around here is the one that argues nothing of what I'm arguing. I never denied foreign investment into China. But again, it's not because there is accelerated economic growth under an authoritarian government that these will:
a) be sustainable in the long run
b) be able to avoid democratization and liberalism if it ever wants to do more out of its economy than what foreign companies are telling her to manufacture
c) resistance to liberal changes for better long term growth are not rational, they are merely myths of anti-foreign sentiments still very present within China and that results in the idea that China can defy economic laws and forever develop using a "Chinese style" of some sort.
|
Well, there's several people here who always said that democratization of China is necessary today and yet many Chinese, including Lee Kuan Yew, believe that economic and social progress is more important than democratization.
a) Nobody knows that it is sustainable in the long run, but they are working oin it. IE, working with Africian countries to secure natural resources, working with foreign companies to invest in it, and even if there's a global recession, they can always use its excess money to create jobs to build in its infrastructure.
b) I don't see there's an issue with democratization and capitalism for China, they are able to do it for such a long time. And Yes, I think they can do more than just manufacture stuff.
c) I don't think they are resistant to liberal changes, at least on the non-political front, as there are already some resistance from the Western Countries to hinder them to grow. Hopefully things will change.
Quote:
|
Singapore has had a tradition of attracting rich merchants and businesses from India, China and Malaysia/Indonesia since the 1500's. They were not just a poor fishing village when they separated, the movement was a group of rich entrepreneurs investing in that territory.
|
True, but changes in China as China is much bigger than Sigapore, changes won't reach countryside until much later than the rural areas.