6 ms·

Disagree on calling Suzhou Industrial Park a failure. I grew up there and can say that while it may not have attracted the desired profit levels it certainly di

Disagree on calling Suzhou Industrial Park a failure. I grew up there and can say that while it may not have attracted the desired profit levels it certainly did have miraculous effect on the people of Suzhou. Wages have sky rocketed (as has property price). It may not have been profitable within 5 years, more than 400 fortune 500 companies had their factories located there in 2014. Suzhou went from a city with two big super markets and one KFC to a city with a mall around every block (and yes people could afford to spend in these malls). Also Lee's success in Singapore is not only due to his authoritarianism as most western scholars put out, but also due to the sheer pragmatism of Singapore's policy making elite. They respect no ideology but the one that is suitable. If they need to have free markets they will have free markets. If they need to regulate pricing they will regulate it.

pydry 6y ago
>Wages have sky rocketed (as has property price). It may not have been profitable within 5 years, more than 400 fortune 500 companies had their factories located there in 2014. Suzhou went from a city with two big super markets and one KFC to a city with a mall around every block (and yes people could afford to spend in these malls). I interpreted from the article that it was nothing special. That is, it followed more or less the same trends as Shanghai, Nanjing, Hangzhou and Wuxi rather than trailblazing its own path.
- accurrent 6y ago
  To be honest WuXi (which is next to Suzhou), was significantly lagging behind it around 2014. I believe that has changed now but I left China more than 6 years ago. SIP definitely had its perks. It was incredibly important for China to attract foreign talent and many foreigners would live in SIP but work in some other city or place. So arguably the growth of cities like WuXi also depended on SIP.
lordnacho 6y ago
That's right, we tend to label every successful economy "capitalism", but actually if you look at Singapore there's some things that are not so obviously free market. Housing, for instance.
- danielheath 6y ago
  Gotta say, housing is one good that the free market seems to not really be amazing at. Here in Australia, it has become an investment vehicle; a huge amount of housing stock is empty while a third of the population are living in very poor accommodation.
  - michaelscott 6y ago
    The approach that seems to work is to give economically elastic things to the free market, and make economically inelastic things (housing, medical care, etc) a responsibility of the state. It's difficult to tell if this is the case as we can only look at macroeconomic effects in hindsight, and this approach would have many problems at scale, but this seems to be the most beneficial approach for society long term?
    - ethanbond 6y ago
      You can get identical effects as Singapore’s state owned land without actually making it state owned/managed/priced by simply instituting a very high Land Value Tax. Rent collected for buildings/management/amenities goes to landlord, rent collected for the physical land upon which the building exists (which is valuable not because of the landlord) is recouped by the community as tax.
      - thehappypm 6y ago
        Higher taxes also directly cause higher rents passed on to renters.
        taktoa 6y ago
        That is uniquely not the case for LVT, because the supply of land is fixed, whereas the demand for housing is variable. EDIT: to be clear, I meant the "passing on to renters" part, not the "property may become more expensive" part.
ginko 6y ago
There was also the 1997 Asian financial crisis around that time.
mytailorisrich 6y ago
> They respect no ideology but the one that is suitable. If they need to have free markets they will have free markets. If they need to regulate pricing they will regulate it. Isn't that what Deng Xiaoping meant when he said that "It doesn't matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice."
AniseAbyss 6y ago
According to some Westerners there is only one road that leads to prosperity. Only Western culture and Western philosophy matters. Blame that Fukuyama- who by the way already backpedaled in the face of real history lol.
- d3nj4l 6y ago
  I don't think so. The rise of China especially has been acknowledged as a point against that, and even Fukuyama has acknowledged that : https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3003547/chinas-authoritarian-way-can-rival-liberal-democracy-if-it https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3003547/ch...
  - hitekker 6y ago
    Fukuyuma's acknowledgement came two decades after the publication of "The End of History". Given how strongly he advocated for the inevitable triumph of his worldview, I think it's fair to label his admission in your article as backpedalling.
- zhdc1 6y ago
  Compare and contrast with the latter part of Yergin & Stanislaw's The Commanding Heights, which goes into detail on the American origins of China's economic policy. Huntington's The Third Wave also applies, since China looks about the same as a lot of other economically developing countries in the mid-late 20th century, including a lot of 'democracies' that were de facto single party states.
thaumasiotes 6y ago
Some pretty interesting remarks in the wikipedia article on SIP: > The SIP ran into trouble when local officials began building Suzhou New District (SND) industrial park to compete with it. As the Suzhou city government had only a minority 35 percent stake in the SIP, while they had a major stake in SND, the city government largely ignored SIP and concentrated on promoting the SND instead. > After incurring losses of some US$90 million over 5 years, the Singapore consortium lowered its stake to 35 percent, raising the Chinese consortium's stake to 65 percent from 35 percent and reducing the Singaporean share from a planned 70 km2 to just 8 km2. The Chinese side appointed Wang Jinhua, vice-mayor of Suzhou and the former manager of the New District, as the new chief executive. > In 2001, one year after Singapore lowered its stake, the park made its first profit of $3.8 million.
Barrin92 6y ago
>Disagree on calling Suzhou Industrial Park a failure Yes. The article also calls out Chandigarh as a 'failed city', but it's one of the highest income regions in India, and one with the cleanest urban environmental footprint. Far from being a failure it seems to have been quite successful.
Aunche 6y ago
Only more authoritarian leaders can get away with pure pragmatism. Singapore easily destroy an old low density housing, and replace it with high density housing. In construction gets postponed can get delayed for years because a renter refuses to leave.

pydry 6y ago

>Wages have sky rocketed (as has property price). It may not have been profitable within 5 years, more than 400 fortune 500 companies had their factories located there in 2014. Suzhou went from a city with two big super markets and one KFC to a city with a mall around every block (and yes people could afford to spend in these malls). I interpreted from the article that it was nothing special. That is, it followed more or less the same trends as Shanghai, Nanjing, Hangzhou and Wuxi rather than trailblazing its own path.

accurrent 6y ago
To be honest WuXi (which is next to Suzhou), was significantly lagging behind it around 2014. I believe that has changed now but I left China more than 6 years ago. SIP definitely had its perks. It was incredibly important for China to attract foreign talent and many foreigners would live in SIP but work in some other city or place. So arguably the growth of cities like WuXi also depended on SIP.

lordnacho 6y ago

That's right, we tend to label every successful economy "capitalism", but actually if you look at Singapore there's some things that are not so obviously free market. Housing, for instance.

danielheath 6y ago
Gotta say, housing is one good that the free market seems to not really be amazing at. Here in Australia, it has become an investment vehicle; a huge amount of housing stock is empty while a third of the population are living in very poor accommodation.
- michaelscott 6y ago
  The approach that seems to work is to give economically elastic things to the free market, and make economically inelastic things (housing, medical care, etc) a responsibility of the state. It's difficult to tell if this is the case as we can only look at macroeconomic effects in hindsight, and this approach would have many problems at scale, but this seems to be the most beneficial approach for society long term?
  - ethanbond 6y ago
    You can get identical effects as Singapore’s state owned land without actually making it state owned/managed/priced by simply instituting a very high Land Value Tax. Rent collected for buildings/management/amenities goes to landlord, rent collected for the physical land upon which the building exists (which is valuable not because of the landlord) is recouped by the community as tax.
    - thehappypm 6y ago
      Higher taxes also directly cause higher rents passed on to renters.
      - taktoa 6y ago
        That is uniquely not the case for LVT, because the supply of land is fixed, whereas the demand for housing is variable. EDIT: to be clear, I meant the "passing on to renters" part, not the "property may become more expensive" part.

ginko 6y ago

There was also the 1997 Asian financial crisis around that time.

mytailorisrich 6y ago

> They respect no ideology but the one that is suitable. If they need to have free markets they will have free markets. If they need to regulate pricing they will regulate it. Isn't that what Deng Xiaoping meant when he said that "It doesn't matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice."

AniseAbyss 6y ago

According to some Westerners there is only one road that leads to prosperity. Only Western culture and Western philosophy matters. Blame that Fukuyama- who by the way already backpedaled in the face of real history lol.

d3nj4l 6y ago
I don't think so. The rise of China especially has been acknowledged as a point against that, and even Fukuyama has acknowledged that : https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3003547/chinas-authoritarian-way-can-rival-liberal-democracy-if-it https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3003547/ch...
- hitekker 6y ago
  Fukuyuma's acknowledgement came two decades after the publication of "The End of History". Given how strongly he advocated for the inevitable triumph of his worldview, I think it's fair to label his admission in your article as backpedalling.
zhdc1 6y ago
Compare and contrast with the latter part of Yergin & Stanislaw's The Commanding Heights, which goes into detail on the American origins of China's economic policy. Huntington's The Third Wave also applies, since China looks about the same as a lot of other economically developing countries in the mid-late 20th century, including a lot of 'democracies' that were de facto single party states.

thaumasiotes 6y ago

Some pretty interesting remarks in the wikipedia article on SIP: > The SIP ran into trouble when local officials began building Suzhou New District (SND) industrial park to compete with it. As the Suzhou city government had only a minority 35 percent stake in the SIP, while they had a major stake in SND, the city government largely ignored SIP and concentrated on promoting the SND instead. > After incurring losses of some US$90 million over 5 years, the Singapore consortium lowered its stake to 35 percent, raising the Chinese consortium's stake to 65 percent from 35 percent and reducing the Singaporean share from a planned 70 km2 to just 8 km2. The Chinese side appointed Wang Jinhua, vice-mayor of Suzhou and the former manager of the New District, as the new chief executive. > In 2001, one year after Singapore lowered its stake, the park made its first profit of $3.8 million.

Barrin92 6y ago

>Disagree on calling Suzhou Industrial Park a failure Yes. The article also calls out Chandigarh as a 'failed city', but it's one of the highest income regions in India, and one with the cleanest urban environmental footprint. Far from being a failure it seems to have been quite successful.

Aunche 6y ago

Only more authoritarian leaders can get away with pure pragmatism. Singapore easily destroy an old low density housing, and replace it with high density housing. In construction gets postponed can get delayed for years because a renter refuses to leave.