5 ms·

Chinese parliament holds 83 Billionaires (2013)

37 points by Tsagadai 11y ago

vzhang 11y ago
Google News link (no pay wall) - http://goo.gl/1ha6Kv http://goo.gl/1ha6Kv
tristanj 11y ago
Mods/submitter, can we add a (2013) to this? Post is dated March 7, 2013. Thanks!
- dang 11y ago
  At your service.
tim333 11y ago
I see a similar phenomenon in Vietnam where I am. If you ban market capitalism but the country still needs housing, jobs and the like then the contracts to build that tend to go to the politicians and their friends.
- simonh 11y ago
  Indeed. I get more and more tired of the lazy stream of anti-capitalist sentiment leaking into HN as though all the worlds problems stem from capitalism. I've spent a fair chunk of my career working in the Middle east or with Middle eastern companies and my wife is Chinese so we have strong connections over there as well. Both have highly centralised, statist systems with heavily restrictions on their economic markets. If you haven't actually been there and lived under non-capitalist systems you have absolutely no idea just how utterly corrupting and venal they can get. It's suffocating, and it's insidious tentacles work their way into every facet of life. It's true that there is corruption in the west. Big corporations do have too much influence on politics. There are problems with the way wealth is becoming concentrated. But the issues we face pale into comparison to the problem in countries that don't have free markets. In the west we have the 1%, but in non-capitalist states it's more like the 0.1%. It's the difference between systems run according to the rule of law which have some corruption, versus systems run by corruption which have some laws. Capitalism is built on the principles of property rights and economic freedom. It turns out taking those away from people isn't a good thing after all.
  - yen223 11y ago
    People are simply wary about ceding too much societal control to a powerful external entity, whether it's big government or big corp.
  - bradgessler 11y ago
    It's the difference between systems run according to the rule of law which have some corruption, versus systems run by corruption which have some laws. This is so well articulated. If you don't already, you should write essays.
    - igravious 11y ago
      If I'm not mistaken, you my friend have been seduced by the rhetorical device of antimetabole[1]. Ask not what language can do for you, ask what you can do for language! Er... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimetabole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimetabole
  - legulere 11y ago
    That's interesting. For me the lawlessness of china stroke me as very capitalist. In some regards it's the capitalists paradise because you can do stuff that's forbidden in western societies. Worker's rights are not as important for instance.
    - simonh 11y ago
      China is certainly an interesting exception to so many rules, but fundamentally capitalism is about the freedom of individuals to employ their capital as they see fit and reap the rewards from profits gained thereby. China does now have a burgeoning private sector, but it exists and thrives only at the discretion of a totalitarian state that runs a parallel statist economy in which political power is the route to wealth. All those billionaire members of the Chinese government didn't gain their wealth by investing capital. They gained it by leveraging political power. Of course now that they have wealth, they want ways to be able to invest it and become capitalists themselves but that side of the economy is more like an oligarchy at this point.
- factorialboy 11y ago
  Much the same in India, especially when a socialist, pro-people, anti-corporate govt. comes into power. The politicians become fat.
  - dingo_bat 11y ago
    To be honest, the politicians in India have always been fat. And I don't recall a single government that could actually be called pro-people.
baby 11y ago
I can't seem to access the article, so no upvote, but if this is indeed true well... such a shame.
- fabrigm 11y ago
  Me neither
akie 11y ago
Mirror: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:foI8v8alIe4J:www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4568598e-8731-11e2-9dd7-00144feabdc0.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:foI8v8a...
jacquesm 11y ago
How does this compare to Russia and India?

37 points by Tsagadai 11y ago

vzhang 11y ago

Google News link (no pay wall) - http://goo.gl/1ha6Kv http://goo.gl/1ha6Kv

tristanj 11y ago

Mods/submitter, can we add a (2013) to this? Post is dated March 7, 2013. Thanks!

dang 11y ago
At your service.

tim333 11y ago

I see a similar phenomenon in Vietnam where I am. If you ban market capitalism but the country still needs housing, jobs and the like then the contracts to build that tend to go to the politicians and their friends.

simonh 11y ago
Indeed. I get more and more tired of the lazy stream of anti-capitalist sentiment leaking into HN as though all the worlds problems stem from capitalism. I've spent a fair chunk of my career working in the Middle east or with Middle eastern companies and my wife is Chinese so we have strong connections over there as well. Both have highly centralised, statist systems with heavily restrictions on their economic markets. If you haven't actually been there and lived under non-capitalist systems you have absolutely no idea just how utterly corrupting and venal they can get. It's suffocating, and it's insidious tentacles work their way into every facet of life. It's true that there is corruption in the west. Big corporations do have too much influence on politics. There are problems with the way wealth is becoming concentrated. But the issues we face pale into comparison to the problem in countries that don't have free markets. In the west we have the 1%, but in non-capitalist states it's more like the 0.1%. It's the difference between systems run according to the rule of law which have some corruption, versus systems run by corruption which have some laws. Capitalism is built on the principles of property rights and economic freedom. It turns out taking those away from people isn't a good thing after all.
- yen223 11y ago
  People are simply wary about ceding too much societal control to a powerful external entity, whether it's big government or big corp.
- bradgessler 11y ago
  It's the difference between systems run according to the rule of law which have some corruption, versus systems run by corruption which have some laws. This is so well articulated. If you don't already, you should write essays.
  - igravious 11y ago
    If I'm not mistaken, you my friend have been seduced by the rhetorical device of antimetabole[1]. Ask not what language can do for you, ask what you can do for language! Er... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimetabole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimetabole
- legulere 11y ago
  That's interesting. For me the lawlessness of china stroke me as very capitalist. In some regards it's the capitalists paradise because you can do stuff that's forbidden in western societies. Worker's rights are not as important for instance.
  - simonh 11y ago
    China is certainly an interesting exception to so many rules, but fundamentally capitalism is about the freedom of individuals to employ their capital as they see fit and reap the rewards from profits gained thereby. China does now have a burgeoning private sector, but it exists and thrives only at the discretion of a totalitarian state that runs a parallel statist economy in which political power is the route to wealth. All those billionaire members of the Chinese government didn't gain their wealth by investing capital. They gained it by leveraging political power. Of course now that they have wealth, they want ways to be able to invest it and become capitalists themselves but that side of the economy is more like an oligarchy at this point.
factorialboy 11y ago
Much the same in India, especially when a socialist, pro-people, anti-corporate govt. comes into power. The politicians become fat.
- dingo_bat 11y ago
  To be honest, the politicians in India have always been fat. And I don't recall a single government that could actually be called pro-people.

baby 11y ago

I can't seem to access the article, so no upvote, but if this is indeed true well... such a shame.

fabrigm 11y ago
Me neither

akie 11y ago

Mirror: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:foI8v8alIe4J:www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4568598e-8731-11e2-9dd7-00144feabdc0.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:foI8v8a...

jacquesm 11y ago

How does this compare to Russia and India?