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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
|
Comparing China to India is baseless as India has many of its problems as well, its just that it is not magnified by your biased western media. As Pug_ster has clearly indicated to you some of the problems that you choose to ignore, there are many other problems that they need to look at as well. The food prices are sky rocketting in the country and the inflation is rising to more than 7% due to shortages of food. It is also due to their so called liberacy, many of their projects that could benefit their people are not implemented or are slow in implementation. Choosing to ignore their problems and exagerate the problems China is facing will do no good and it does not show the maturity of your argument.
If you keep arguing with me about the current position where US, Japan, Canada or any other developed nations for that matter, is more advanced than is China, you are just wasting my time. These are not up for argument. These are facts! China is developing now. I have to keep stressing this again and again and it is pointless for me to explain it more. What has passed are history, what are present are facts, the predictions are for the future. What you keep arguing is the present situation where there are no basis for argument. It is already a fact, that China is less develop than western countries. What I am trying to tell you is that China is working hard towards improving itself and be develop as you guys are and they are moving it right.
China has 1.3 billion people. view it here,
People's Republic of China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia China has as of 2002, 90.9% (male: 95.1%; female: 86.5%) of the population over age 15 are literate. Lets take a modest 900 million of that population of over 15 years of age. close to 800 million of people are educated. Lets take another figure out of it, merely 1% are engineers. There would be more than 80 million engineers in China already much more than the population of few contries combined. If 30% of that population is very well educated, which is not impossible, over 200 million well educated citizen are already in China contributing. If you cannot see the bright future of this copuntry, I would have no more basis of arguing with you as you can shut your common sense and believe whatever you chose to believe.
Democracy is not a clear one and only pill to cure all social deseases. Different country has different problems, culture, educational background and may view democracy differently. Let me give you an example. If majority of the citizen are in hunger and low educated, would you think it will blosom if democracy prevails? They are fighting and thinking of how to put food on the table and solve their hunger, and less would they think of whether their voices are heard. Take India for example. Their problems are already being stated and I do not want to further discuss on it. Another funny thought is that people like you can receive authoritarian from your bosses while you are at work but does not seem to take authoritarian socially even if the things done are right. To me, it all depends on results that show. In a company, the CEO is making its calls, has a common goal and force you to achieve them or you will be fired. You are not objecting it. It seems to me you guys are really contradicting to yourself.
About singapore's past, it is already a history and you can check it through the internet without much explanation from me. And yes, there are many foreign direct investments flowing into the country to help it blosom. But it is not that the investment comes naturally. Singaporeans led by MM Lee Kuan Yew made the effort to mordernise the city and improve the law, transportation and ease of doing business that the investors are confident in coming to the country. They have transformed themselves many times over to suit the need of the society and world at large. By the way, MM Lee Kuan Yew is running the country like a corporate and is an authoritarian, something that is so bothering to you.