5 ms·

> Why didn't they do so already. They did. The Chinese economy has pulled more people out of poverty in the past few decades than any economy in human history.

> Why didn't they do so already. They did. The Chinese economy has pulled more people out of poverty in the past few decades than any economy in human history. By far. "In 1990 there were more than 750 million people in China living below the international poverty line - about two-thirds of the population. By 2012, that had fallen to fewer than 90 million, and by 2016 - the most recent year for which World Bank figures are available - it had fallen to 7.2 million people" Mistaking the China of today for the China of 50 years ago would be naive and dangerous. Fortunately most world leaders are savvy enough to be taking action to compete. This is not an endorsement of the Chinese government. It's just a factual observation of recent history.

neither_color 4y ago
I never quite understood that line since they pretty much purged themselves in the first place and were "lifting themselves" after sinking themselves in the cultural revolution. They opened up after visiting Asian Tiger economies and realizing they were far behind Singapore, South Korea, et al.
- tchaffee 4y ago
  If you want to blame them for the bad you need to give them credit for recent accomplishments. Unless you think it's a line that Americans sunk themselves in The Great Depression and therefore American leaders should get no credit for the following recovery. Leaders change. Economic policy changes. China changed direction and lifted a huge number of people out of poverty. It's as simple as that. > They opened up after visiting Asian Tiger economies and realizing they were far behind Singapore, South Korea, et al. And? What's the point? That they learned by observing? Is that bad?
  - neither_color 4y ago
    The Great Depression was not a deliberate purge, markets follow boom and bust cycles. >And? What's the point? That they learned by observing? Is that bad? It's a self-serving bias to attribute their economic development to their leadership. They would've developed sooner and are simply taking credit for getting out of their own way. Sure, you can point to specific projects and say "the government bankrolled this therefore it exists" but it's not like in their absence nothing would have developed. Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei, Seoul, Tokyo et al have pretty skylines and good public transportation too.
    - tchaffee 4y ago
      > The Great Depression was not a deliberate purge, markets follow boom and bust cycles. Right. You're doing exactly what I pointed out before: making excuses for US economic policy when it fails but giving it the credit when it succeeds. > They would've developed sooner and are simply taking credit for getting out of their own way. Who is "they"? You do realize China has had more than one leader in the past 50 years? > They would've developed sooner Uh sure. So what? The point is that they are wildly succeeded the past couple of decades. The original claim that started this was they haven't done anything remarkable yet. Which as a matter of historical record, is wrong. The past 20 years have been remarkable for wiping out poverty in China. Regardless of whether or not that poverty could have been wiped out earlier, it was wiped out. And this happened under the current Chinese government. So the claim that the current Chinese government can "achieve miracles" in 20 years -- while exaggerated -- is far closer to the counter claim that they have achieved nothing yet. > taking credit for getting out of their own way. That would not be how most economists would describe Chinese economic policy. It doesn't even describe the relatively less controlled US economic policy.

neither_color 4y ago

I never quite understood that line since they pretty much purged themselves in the first place and were "lifting themselves" after sinking themselves in the cultural revolution. They opened up after visiting Asian Tiger economies and realizing they were far behind Singapore, South Korea, et al.

tchaffee 4y ago
If you want to blame them for the bad you need to give them credit for recent accomplishments. Unless you think it's a line that Americans sunk themselves in The Great Depression and therefore American leaders should get no credit for the following recovery. Leaders change. Economic policy changes. China changed direction and lifted a huge number of people out of poverty. It's as simple as that. > They opened up after visiting Asian Tiger economies and realizing they were far behind Singapore, South Korea, et al. And? What's the point? That they learned by observing? Is that bad?
- neither_color 4y ago
  The Great Depression was not a deliberate purge, markets follow boom and bust cycles. >And? What's the point? That they learned by observing? Is that bad? It's a self-serving bias to attribute their economic development to their leadership. They would've developed sooner and are simply taking credit for getting out of their own way. Sure, you can point to specific projects and say "the government bankrolled this therefore it exists" but it's not like in their absence nothing would have developed. Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei, Seoul, Tokyo et al have pretty skylines and good public transportation too.
  - tchaffee 4y ago
    > The Great Depression was not a deliberate purge, markets follow boom and bust cycles. Right. You're doing exactly what I pointed out before: making excuses for US economic policy when it fails but giving it the credit when it succeeds. > They would've developed sooner and are simply taking credit for getting out of their own way. Who is "they"? You do realize China has had more than one leader in the past 50 years? > They would've developed sooner Uh sure. So what? The point is that they are wildly succeeded the past couple of decades. The original claim that started this was they haven't done anything remarkable yet. Which as a matter of historical record, is wrong. The past 20 years have been remarkable for wiping out poverty in China. Regardless of whether or not that poverty could have been wiped out earlier, it was wiped out. And this happened under the current Chinese government. So the claim that the current Chinese government can "achieve miracles" in 20 years -- while exaggerated -- is far closer to the counter claim that they have achieved nothing yet. > taking credit for getting out of their own way. That would not be how most economists would describe Chinese economic policy. It doesn't even describe the relatively less controlled US economic policy.