4 ms·

> Families with this kind of mindset are unlikely to stay poor for more than 1-2 generations. (This is probably one reason why hundreds of millions in China aro

> Families with this kind of mindset are unlikely to stay poor for more than 1-2 generations. (This is probably one reason why hundreds of millions in China arose from poverty to middle-class in a single generation, although I do not see many economists in the West discussing it in the context of China's rise.) What? China's economic boom has little to do with their view on education. They "simply" moved from farmers in extreme poverty to 6 day/12h shifts factory workers in poverty. I don't dispute it's relatively better for everyone, but it's hardly something to aspire to (particularly since other countries made the transition ages ago, so it's not even replicable unless we're talking about a really poor country that now has to compete with China too). The BBC article has a much more negative spin about this than you portray. It even suggests it can be detrimental to the country. The real reason some cultures obsess about education is because there are severe and very real penalties if you fail some exam in middle school. Finally, this is direct contradiction with your parent comment. Are poor people poor because they don't invest in the future or are they more likely to? Because if all you're saying is that poor people who invest long-term will not stay poor, that's almost a tautology.

nopinsight 9y ago
I said "one reason why...". I am aware that there are other forces at work for China's rise. However, if you look at many other countries on the verge of industrialization, for example some in Latin America or Southeast Asia, the rise has not been nearly as rapid and they tend to get stuck at the middle-income level (and sometimes worse). Why has the industrialization of East Asia been so much faster and go further than in most other regions of the world? Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, ..., and likely China. Also look at their PISA scores [1] (or other international exams). I believe that one major factor is the emphasis of education in the culture. If you have other explanations, I'd like to hear. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisa > The real reason some cultures obsess about education is because there are severe and very real penalties if you fail some exam in middle school. The penetration of cultural emphasis on education is much deeper and broader than that. It starts almost from birth, and often before, and at all levels of society. Many people there pick partners using strong filters on educational level and institutions attended. High-achieving students are admired, not bullied, for example. The real reasons go back thousands of years. Check out Confucius philosophy and Chinese imperial examinations. [2][3] [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucianism [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination > if all you're saying is that poor people who invest long-term will not stay poor, that's almost a tautology. I said that because you claimed that investing long-term is probably the effect of being well-off. Note: I agree there are drawbacks to extreme emphasis on education. But it is a good predictor of long-term material successes of a community and a country.
- vilmosi 9y ago
  > The real reasons go back thousands of years. The why has China's industrialisation happen so late? > I said that because you claimed that investing long-term is probably the effect of being well-off. That is the main argument here. I still think it's an effect. Everyone knows saving for a pension is worth it, everyone knows a more expensive fridge is more economical, everyone knows expensive shoes last longer, but not everyone can afford these solutions. > Note: I agree there are drawbacks to extreme emphasis on education. But it is a good predictor of long-term material successes of a community and a country. The South Korean government disagrees with you. FYI I am reading your sources. One important concept in Confucianism is this: > Social harmony results in part from every individual knowing his or her place in the natural order, and playing his or her part well. It's not a guide that promotes social mobility. It was created for a certain time and place.
pm90 9y ago
I don't think this is a good reply to what the parent asserted. > What? China's economic boom has little to do with their view on education. It most certainly does. You need to be educated to manage all those factories that make everything from toys to factories. You need educated engineers to design and build those factories in the first place. And you need educated people to engage in scientific research in your universities. In other words, a country doesn't simply become economically developed without having a culture of valuing education, and China has definitely been helped by its society's emphasis on getting an education. > The real reason some cultures obsess about education is because there are severe and very real penalties if you fail some exam in middle school. This is definitely not true. You can't coerce people to be educated by penalties. The simple fact is that even the poor understand that getting an education is one of the most reliable (and often only) paths to wealth and a better quality of life.
- vilmosi 9y ago
  I think you misunderstood my comment, I'm sorry, I did not mean that. > It most certainly does. You need to be educated to manage all those factories that make everything from toys to factories. You need educated engineers to design and build those factories in the first place. And you need educated people to engage in scientific research in your universities. I think you're putting the cart before the horse. Yes, there's a rising demand for qualified people. But that demand didn't arise because the supply was too great. Typically when supply rises, wages drop. China is the opposite. > The simple fact is that even the poor understand that getting an education is one of the most reliable (and often only) paths to wealth and a better quality of life. Then why are rich people more likely to have higher education? Why do the rich in China value education just as much if not more? Why are top universities in the world not in China? I don't disagree with you here. I know the poor know this. I'm saying they're not stupid, they just can't "invest" as much. Also, even the poor?! Seriously?
  - pm90 9y ago
    > I think you misunderstood my comment, I'm sorry, I did not mean that. No worries :). One thing I like about HN is professional discourse and debate, rather than the utter chaos that conversations in other fora devolve into. > I think you're putting the cart before the horse. Yes, there's a rising demand for qualified people. But that demand didn't arise because the supply was too great. Typically when supply rises, wages drop. China is the opposite. I agree with the fact. Honestly, I'm not sure about the underlying reasons for economic growth in China, so I will concede that I don't have much to back my assertion. > Then why are rich people more likely to have higher education? Why do the rich in China value education just as much if not more? Why are top universities in the world not in China? You are asking very broad questions as if they are closely related, which they are not. Rich people are free from the daily grinds of making ends meet which gives them more time to pursue some kind of education. They also have the means to afford the costs associated with getting an education, and are less likely to drop out because of monetary reasons. Top universities in the world are not in China because of many many reasons. Some reasons are: 1. There is already a hospitable environment for academia in the US. Much like SV, its hard to replicate elsewhere. 2. English is not the medium of Instruction in many Chinese universities, making it harder to attract talent from around the world. 3. Not quite sure about this, but I'm guessing the US spends more on scientific research and engineering than China. 4. China until very recently (speaking relatively) was not a very politically stable country, and stability is very necessary for an academic community to take hold and grow strong. Most US Universities have been around at least since after the Civil War and European universities have been around for much much longer. All of that is changing of course, but I'm pointing out the reasons why it is the way it is now. > Also, even the poor?! Seriously? Please don't quote me out of context. By even, my intention was that people who are trying hard to make ends meet, who don't have the basic necessities of life ... still understand that getting an education, which takes time and has no immediate alleviating benefits, can help them and is a path out of poverty. I did not intend to imply that they are somehow a lesser class of people, as you seem to imply with that statement.

nopinsight 9y ago

I said "one reason why...". I am aware that there are other forces at work for China's rise. However, if you look at many other countries on the verge of industrialization, for example some in Latin America or Southeast Asia, the rise has not been nearly as rapid and they tend to get stuck at the middle-income level (and sometimes worse). Why has the industrialization of East Asia been so much faster and go further than in most other regions of the world? Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, ..., and likely China. Also look at their PISA scores [1] (or other international exams). I believe that one major factor is the emphasis of education in the culture. If you have other explanations, I'd like to hear. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisa > The real reason some cultures obsess about education is because there are severe and very real penalties if you fail some exam in middle school. The penetration of cultural emphasis on education is much deeper and broader than that. It starts almost from birth, and often before, and at all levels of society. Many people there pick partners using strong filters on educational level and institutions attended. High-achieving students are admired, not bullied, for example. The real reasons go back thousands of years. Check out Confucius philosophy and Chinese imperial examinations. [2][3] [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucianism [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination > if all you're saying is that poor people who invest long-term will not stay poor, that's almost a tautology. I said that because you claimed that investing long-term is probably the effect of being well-off. Note: I agree there are drawbacks to extreme emphasis on education. But it is a good predictor of long-term material successes of a community and a country.

vilmosi 9y ago
> The real reasons go back thousands of years. The why has China's industrialisation happen so late? > I said that because you claimed that investing long-term is probably the effect of being well-off. That is the main argument here. I still think it's an effect. Everyone knows saving for a pension is worth it, everyone knows a more expensive fridge is more economical, everyone knows expensive shoes last longer, but not everyone can afford these solutions. > Note: I agree there are drawbacks to extreme emphasis on education. But it is a good predictor of long-term material successes of a community and a country. The South Korean government disagrees with you. FYI I am reading your sources. One important concept in Confucianism is this: > Social harmony results in part from every individual knowing his or her place in the natural order, and playing his or her part well. It's not a guide that promotes social mobility. It was created for a certain time and place.

pm90 9y ago

I don't think this is a good reply to what the parent asserted. > What? China's economic boom has little to do with their view on education. It most certainly does. You need to be educated to manage all those factories that make everything from toys to factories. You need educated engineers to design and build those factories in the first place. And you need educated people to engage in scientific research in your universities. In other words, a country doesn't simply become economically developed without having a culture of valuing education, and China has definitely been helped by its society's emphasis on getting an education. > The real reason some cultures obsess about education is because there are severe and very real penalties if you fail some exam in middle school. This is definitely not true. You can't coerce people to be educated by penalties. The simple fact is that even the poor understand that getting an education is one of the most reliable (and often only) paths to wealth and a better quality of life.

vilmosi 9y ago
I think you misunderstood my comment, I'm sorry, I did not mean that. > It most certainly does. You need to be educated to manage all those factories that make everything from toys to factories. You need educated engineers to design and build those factories in the first place. And you need educated people to engage in scientific research in your universities. I think you're putting the cart before the horse. Yes, there's a rising demand for qualified people. But that demand didn't arise because the supply was too great. Typically when supply rises, wages drop. China is the opposite. > The simple fact is that even the poor understand that getting an education is one of the most reliable (and often only) paths to wealth and a better quality of life. Then why are rich people more likely to have higher education? Why do the rich in China value education just as much if not more? Why are top universities in the world not in China? I don't disagree with you here. I know the poor know this. I'm saying they're not stupid, they just can't "invest" as much. Also, even the poor?! Seriously?
- pm90 9y ago
  > I think you misunderstood my comment, I'm sorry, I did not mean that. No worries :). One thing I like about HN is professional discourse and debate, rather than the utter chaos that conversations in other fora devolve into. > I think you're putting the cart before the horse. Yes, there's a rising demand for qualified people. But that demand didn't arise because the supply was too great. Typically when supply rises, wages drop. China is the opposite. I agree with the fact. Honestly, I'm not sure about the underlying reasons for economic growth in China, so I will concede that I don't have much to back my assertion. > Then why are rich people more likely to have higher education? Why do the rich in China value education just as much if not more? Why are top universities in the world not in China? You are asking very broad questions as if they are closely related, which they are not. Rich people are free from the daily grinds of making ends meet which gives them more time to pursue some kind of education. They also have the means to afford the costs associated with getting an education, and are less likely to drop out because of monetary reasons. Top universities in the world are not in China because of many many reasons. Some reasons are: 1. There is already a hospitable environment for academia in the US. Much like SV, its hard to replicate elsewhere. 2. English is not the medium of Instruction in many Chinese universities, making it harder to attract talent from around the world. 3. Not quite sure about this, but I'm guessing the US spends more on scientific research and engineering than China. 4. China until very recently (speaking relatively) was not a very politically stable country, and stability is very necessary for an academic community to take hold and grow strong. Most US Universities have been around at least since after the Civil War and European universities have been around for much much longer. All of that is changing of course, but I'm pointing out the reasons why it is the way it is now. > Also, even the poor?! Seriously? Please don't quote me out of context. By even, my intention was that people who are trying hard to make ends meet, who don't have the basic necessities of life ... still understand that getting an education, which takes time and has no immediate alleviating benefits, can help them and is a path out of poverty. I did not intend to imply that they are somehow a lesser class of people, as you seem to imply with that statement.