> When e.g. people suggest that China is having "economic problems" and growth is "slowing", over the last 30 years the Chinese idea of "normal" (5-8%) is the U

> When e.g. people suggest that China is having "economic problems" and growth is "slowing", over the last 30 years the Chinese idea of "normal" (5-8%) is the USA's idea of "extraordinary". It's all relative. It's easier to make five cents out of one dollar than it is five dollars out of one hundred dollars. Furthermore, you might wish to enquire why, exactly, you see the growth rates you do in China, and whether that makes it a good broad indicator from the outside. What made the PRC so attractive to development over the last 30-40 years? India also has a large workforce and a low cost of labor, and Eastern Europe instituted market reforms similar to those that China undertook at around the same time, yet neither were the darlings of those who wanted to export manufacturing jobs from the West to cheaper markets. The answer likely involves, at least in part, the fact that China doesn't allow for people to exercise their innate human right to organize. India is a democratic republic, and most Eastern European countries were transitioning to democratic republicanism around the time that their market reforms were enacted, same time as China did their market reforms. People in a democratic republic can do things like form labor unions, petition to block the construction of factories in sensitive areas, and do other things that reduce capital's ability to transfer value as profit. These things regularly happen to some extent in Eastern Europe, India, and the US. We saw what happened when people in China wanted more say in their government in 1989, as did business leaders. If cutting manufacturing costs meant some student got crushed by a main battle tank for wanting the right to cast a ballot or run contrary to the Party's platform, so it was. You have to be careful with the broad indicators.