5 ms·

I have lived in China. The New York Times sees the solution as privatization. Very American. But if privatization happens in China it will be like in Russia: A

I have lived in China. The New York Times sees the solution as privatization. Very American. But if privatization happens in China it will be like in Russia: A few will be given the property of all(as the property is in theory collective of all). Russians are so angry about privatization there. I am not such a fan of the American system, USA is very rich but also terribly poor. Living in the USA you see poorer people than anywhere else in a western society. And poverty is rising enormously. Ironically, the original American system was giving property in small chunks to anyone who took it from the Indians. This differentiated it from systems like Latin America, in which property was given to a very few people. This has been a total disaster for them. Also, US of A territory is as big as China for 5 times less people. There are ways in between. You can make cooperatives that aggregate rights(which is what Chinese have, not property) of small farmers into big territories. I was born in Spain and some cooperatives work very well there because they are well organized by the same workers. It is very common to share tractors or distribution channels between a group of farmers.

Shivetya 12y ago
There is very little difference in who holds wealth and power between Russia, China, or the US. Politicians control most of it, while some will point out they don't control as much wealth in the US they pretty much do, they control the laws and regulation and as in Russia and China use it to influence direct or indirectly the behavior of those who are not politicians but have money to pay them off. Sometimes it works, other times it does not.
- tormeh 12y ago
  Snap out of it. Please. I recommend you actually go to Russia. Don't go to China, because the Chinese government is actually trying to not look (and be) completely corrupt, while the Russian government are unashamed gangsters. A Russian acquaintance of mine once said "I don't have a big company; I'm no criminal". Just reflect on that: You cannot be a successful businessman in Russia without using illegal means. A legally successful businessman in Russia is a logical impossibility.
cfontes 12y ago
"USA is very rich but also terribly poor. Living in the USA you see poorer people than anywhere else in a western society. And poverty is rising enormously." WHAT ??? Have you been to central/south america? No matter how bad it is in the US right now, Bolivia/Haiti/Brazil/Venezuela/Paraguay/... has people that is in worst situations by all standards you can think.
- solaris152000 12y ago
  They are not 'Western' Societies.
  - T-hawk 12y ago
    There's some no-true-Scotsman going on there. If one defines anywhere with more poverty than the US as not western, then by definition the US will have the most poverty of western societies.
    - jjoonathan 12y ago
      One does not have to play with definitions to make this look bad: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility#mediaviewer/File:Social_mobility_is_lower_in_more_unequal_countries.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility#mediaviewer/Fil...
  - vilhelm_s 12y ago
    They are, according to many definitions of "Western". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world#Modern_definitions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world#Modern_definitio...
chrisBob 12y ago
>I have lived in China. > USA is very rich but also terribly poor. Living in the USA you see poorer people than anywhere else in a western society. And poverty is rising enormously. This is a very interesting perspective; did you ever travel to rural parts of China? I have never been to china, but my Chinese lab mate says that the best translation for Chinese outside of the cities is "peasant" not farmer. One good example of the way these people are treated is the lack of public education for people in these areas. In the US some schools are much better than others, but every child is guaranteed a public education, and has the opportunity to train for a reasonable job. Similarly I have friends from Iraq and Nepal who are happy here. Pretty much everyone in the US has heat, running water, a modern dwelling... I know very little about Europe and other western societies though, so perhaps it is much worse here than in some places.
- rsynnott 12y ago
  > This is a very interesting perspective; did you ever travel to rural parts of China? China isn't what would normally be considered a western society; I assume they were talking about the developed world. Much of the developed world does have substantially better social safety nets that the US, and lower rates of income inequality, though probably not due to the distribution of ownership of farmland.
  - zo1 12y ago
    "Much of the developed world does have substantially better social safety nets that the US, and lower rates of income inequality" Can you point me to your sources on this, I'm quite curious?
    - dragontamer 12y ago
      The better social safety nets are damn obvious. Much of Europe (including UK) has free education up to College-level, truly universal healthcare (State-Sponsored for all citizens). As for income inequality, the statistics are pretty telling. http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/08/news/economy/global_income_inequality/ http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/08/news/economy/global_income_i... But it is the goal of liberalism to have strong social safety nets and equalize pay to all. The US has a different culture with different values... tending towards the "conservative" and with great trust in market forces. "Obamacare" is seen as Socialism and half the population seems to hate it. But Obamacare only establishes rules for the free market to operate under... standardizing health care plans across insurance companies. There is no state-sponsored health care from the law, and yet people are still worried about socialism. Obamacare is closer to Credit Card reform, in that it forced all credit card companies in the US to standardize upon the "Annual Percentage Rate" / APR so that everyone can comparison shop across credit cards. With Obamacare, all insurance companies have to offer similar plans (bronze, silver, gold, platinum), and they must cover certain provisions (contraceptives make the controversy here). So now when you see a "Bronze" plan from say... Aetna Health Insurance, you know it is similar to "Bronze" plans from Kaiser Permanente. As far as the "Socialism" goes... US has had Medicare / Medicaid for nearly 80 years now. The "socialist" part of our health care system has existed for a very long time, but no Republican seems to want to attack it. But inside the US, any new laws upon the market is seen as a "Market Distortion" and is criticized as "Socialism". Because most American's don't even know the meaning of that word. The absurdity in the "Net Neutrality" argument is more proof of the free market sheeple ignoring important issues and placing their trust in the free market instead.
SixSigma 12y ago
In 1950 ten million people worked the land in the US. That figure is now at about one million. It wasn't just agricultural policy of "get big or get out" and the Green Revolution that drove this change. The farmers were a powerful political force. It was chosen to take away that power.
adventured 12y ago
Spain has 30% real unemployment, Greece has all but collapsed, Portugal is an economic disaster. You're inventing those claims regarding US poor being worse off than all other poor in the Western world. American poor as a qualification is a much higher standard than in countries like Spain or Portugal or Greece to name three. Half of Europe is extremely impoverished compared to the US standard. The average poor American is better off than the average poor person in those countries, both in terms of what they possess materially, what social welfare they get, and how large their dwelling is.

Shivetya 12y ago

There is very little difference in who holds wealth and power between Russia, China, or the US. Politicians control most of it, while some will point out they don't control as much wealth in the US they pretty much do, they control the laws and regulation and as in Russia and China use it to influence direct or indirectly the behavior of those who are not politicians but have money to pay them off. Sometimes it works, other times it does not.

tormeh 12y ago
Snap out of it. Please. I recommend you actually go to Russia. Don't go to China, because the Chinese government is actually trying to not look (and be) completely corrupt, while the Russian government are unashamed gangsters. A Russian acquaintance of mine once said "I don't have a big company; I'm no criminal". Just reflect on that: You cannot be a successful businessman in Russia without using illegal means. A legally successful businessman in Russia is a logical impossibility.

cfontes 12y ago

"USA is very rich but also terribly poor. Living in the USA you see poorer people than anywhere else in a western society. And poverty is rising enormously." WHAT ??? Have you been to central/south america? No matter how bad it is in the US right now, Bolivia/Haiti/Brazil/Venezuela/Paraguay/... has people that is in worst situations by all standards you can think.

solaris152000 12y ago
They are not 'Western' Societies.
- T-hawk 12y ago
  There's some no-true-Scotsman going on there. If one defines anywhere with more poverty than the US as not western, then by definition the US will have the most poverty of western societies.
  - jjoonathan 12y ago
    One does not have to play with definitions to make this look bad: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility#mediaviewer/File:Social_mobility_is_lower_in_more_unequal_countries.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility#mediaviewer/Fil...
- vilhelm_s 12y ago
  They are, according to many definitions of "Western". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world#Modern_definitions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world#Modern_definitio...

chrisBob 12y ago

>I have lived in China. > USA is very rich but also terribly poor. Living in the USA you see poorer people than anywhere else in a western society. And poverty is rising enormously. This is a very interesting perspective; did you ever travel to rural parts of China? I have never been to china, but my Chinese lab mate says that the best translation for Chinese outside of the cities is "peasant" not farmer. One good example of the way these people are treated is the lack of public education for people in these areas. In the US some schools are much better than others, but every child is guaranteed a public education, and has the opportunity to train for a reasonable job. Similarly I have friends from Iraq and Nepal who are happy here. Pretty much everyone in the US has heat, running water, a modern dwelling... I know very little about Europe and other western societies though, so perhaps it is much worse here than in some places.

rsynnott 12y ago
> This is a very interesting perspective; did you ever travel to rural parts of China? China isn't what would normally be considered a western society; I assume they were talking about the developed world. Much of the developed world does have substantially better social safety nets that the US, and lower rates of income inequality, though probably not due to the distribution of ownership of farmland.
- zo1 12y ago
  "Much of the developed world does have substantially better social safety nets that the US, and lower rates of income inequality" Can you point me to your sources on this, I'm quite curious?
  - dragontamer 12y ago
    The better social safety nets are damn obvious. Much of Europe (including UK) has free education up to College-level, truly universal healthcare (State-Sponsored for all citizens). As for income inequality, the statistics are pretty telling. http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/08/news/economy/global_income_inequality/ http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/08/news/economy/global_income_i... But it is the goal of liberalism to have strong social safety nets and equalize pay to all. The US has a different culture with different values... tending towards the "conservative" and with great trust in market forces. "Obamacare" is seen as Socialism and half the population seems to hate it. But Obamacare only establishes rules for the free market to operate under... standardizing health care plans across insurance companies. There is no state-sponsored health care from the law, and yet people are still worried about socialism. Obamacare is closer to Credit Card reform, in that it forced all credit card companies in the US to standardize upon the "Annual Percentage Rate" / APR so that everyone can comparison shop across credit cards. With Obamacare, all insurance companies have to offer similar plans (bronze, silver, gold, platinum), and they must cover certain provisions (contraceptives make the controversy here). So now when you see a "Bronze" plan from say... Aetna Health Insurance, you know it is similar to "Bronze" plans from Kaiser Permanente. As far as the "Socialism" goes... US has had Medicare / Medicaid for nearly 80 years now. The "socialist" part of our health care system has existed for a very long time, but no Republican seems to want to attack it. But inside the US, any new laws upon the market is seen as a "Market Distortion" and is criticized as "Socialism". Because most American's don't even know the meaning of that word. The absurdity in the "Net Neutrality" argument is more proof of the free market sheeple ignoring important issues and placing their trust in the free market instead.

SixSigma 12y ago

In 1950 ten million people worked the land in the US. That figure is now at about one million. It wasn't just agricultural policy of "get big or get out" and the Green Revolution that drove this change. The farmers were a powerful political force. It was chosen to take away that power.

adventured 12y ago

Spain has 30% real unemployment, Greece has all but collapsed, Portugal is an economic disaster. You're inventing those claims regarding US poor being worse off than all other poor in the Western world. American poor as a qualification is a much higher standard than in countries like Spain or Portugal or Greece to name three. Half of Europe is extremely impoverished compared to the US standard. The average poor American is better off than the average poor person in those countries, both in terms of what they possess materially, what social welfare they get, and how large their dwelling is.