4 ms·

South Korea expanded rapidly during a military dictatorship in the 1960s and 1970s[1]. A large chunk of of their economy was (is??) tied to huge conglomerates w

South Korea expanded rapidly during a military dictatorship in the 1960s and 1970s[1]. A large chunk of of their economy was (is??) tied to huge conglomerates with major ties to the government known as Chaebols[2]. > The only thing government did was not to come in the way of the people to have better life through hard work. At least in the case of South Korea, that is demonstrably false. There were, and are, lots of links between these large, successful international Chaebols and the government. Without government support, and protectionist measures shielding them from foreign competition it's unlikely they'd have grown as large and successful as they are today (similar to China today blocking foreign Big Tech companies from operating in China, to grow their own national champions). I know less about the other Asian economies you mention, but the "East Asian Model"[3] runs contrary to what you say about hard work alone. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_Chung-hee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_Chung-hee [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaebol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaebol [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Asian_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Asian_model

dragonsh 5y ago
Chaebols of South Korea are same as big conglomerates and top 1% in USA who control livelihood of majority of Americans. So this will mean that USA is same as South Korea driven by America first policy. USA foreign policy and access to market is also dependent on America first policy driven by large conglomerates not very different from those in South Korea, China and Japan. Recently there are ample examples where USA restricted market access when it’s own conglomerates are in trouble (using some flimsy excuse in the name of security and national interests). Besides reading some report please spend time in those countries and you will know an average citizens commitment to hard work in general (don’t make exception as rule). Prosperity do not come due to government policy but due to hard work of majority.
- throwaway2037 5y ago
  Downvoters: Can you explain why you are downvoting? The last paragraph might be debated, but many downvotes with zero comments? That makes no sense to me. The first two paragraphs are spot-on. Even if you don't like the style of last paragraph, if you just look at the number of hours per worker in those countries, it is globally leading. There is real substance in this comment.

dragonsh 5y ago

Chaebols of South Korea are same as big conglomerates and top 1% in USA who control livelihood of majority of Americans. So this will mean that USA is same as South Korea driven by America first policy. USA foreign policy and access to market is also dependent on America first policy driven by large conglomerates not very different from those in South Korea, China and Japan. Recently there are ample examples where USA restricted market access when it’s own conglomerates are in trouble (using some flimsy excuse in the name of security and national interests). Besides reading some report please spend time in those countries and you will know an average citizens commitment to hard work in general (don’t make exception as rule). Prosperity do not come due to government policy but due to hard work of majority.

throwaway2037 5y ago
Downvoters: Can you explain why you are downvoting? The last paragraph might be debated, but many downvotes with zero comments? That makes no sense to me. The first two paragraphs are spot-on. Even if you don't like the style of last paragraph, if you just look at the number of hours per worker in those countries, it is globally leading. There is real substance in this comment.