Is China the new idol for emerging economies?

Well, let me put it this way:
Many people in East Germany still want the Berlin Wall back, because they had a guaranteed job, did not have to starve, housing was cheap.

It may be interesting to look at poverty in China before we praise they’re success. China’s poverty line is set at 6.3 yuan per day ($1.25). In the US it is $31.47 per day and that doesn’t count food stamps or any other assistance. I may be wrong but I think I’d rather be poor in the US than in China. 362 million Chinese earn less than $2 per day. If that sounds appealing maybe the world will rush to that system.

@Jaxk
“If that sounds appealing maybe the world will rush to that system.”
They are. That is why almost everything that the west consumes is manufactured there.

An idol? As in worthy of worship? I don’t think so.

The lowest rungs of the Chinese society are still hungry, have no freedom, and live in a country where weeks pass without being able to breathe fresh air. The food is adulterated to the point of being poisonous, the water is poisonous, and complaints will get you jailed.

That’s no way to run an economy.

@ragingloli

There’s no question that a dictatorship is more agile than a democracy. Democracies are messy and slow to turn. Dictatorships can turn on a dime and they have a wonderful way of reducing poverty, they slaughter the peasants.

Over 16 minutes to rationalise the abuses and oppressiveness of an authoritarian regime, just because it’s more convenient and profitable to capitalist investors.

Nothing to see here. Just a neoliberal economist unquestioningly spouting her narrative, without questioning any of her own underlying assumptions.

Life in Chinese cities isn’t much different from life in the West and you see lots of new cars in the streets. The regime is not oppressive, however you can’t access Facebook or YouTube but there are ways around that.

The most oppressive things the government does is to enforce the one child policy and force peasants from their land to create room for the cities but you could argue that is necessary to curb China’s enormous population and improve living standards. However I would personally feel uncomfortable living in a country where you can’t vote the bums out.

The lady in the video says people in the undeveloped world have a choice between food and shelter and political freedom. Where does that come from? It is not unreasonable to want both. Why can’t they have both?

Thought I would contribute some more thoughts on China and how it’s developping and setup: http://www.ted.com/talks/eric_x_li_a_tale_of_two_political_systems.html

There’s a growing list of positive discussions about China on the Ted website.

@ragingloli That’s a disturbing thought.

@Jaxk I’m trying to look at trends, trying to see the forest. For 30 years as our population has grown, the middle class has been shrinking and the ranks of the poor have been growing. In that same time, the income of the top 1% has shot up by a staggering 391%. The exact opposite if happening in China, as more and more people joining the ranks of the middle class and poverty is on the decline. In perfect ideologue fashion you insist there is no forest to see because you select one or two particular trees within the forest that suit your ideological bias, and you stick your nose right up against those selected tree’s bark. Forest? you say. Poppycock! There is nothing but these two trees I like here. Well, as you’re so fond of saying, “Nice try!” But the big picture is actually more informative than the exceptions that prove the rule.

@ragingloli Yes, the developing world is very open to the Chinese system.

@zenvelo I think that if you listen to Dr. Dambasio’s talk, it is beyond clear she is using “idol” in this sense of the word; “a greatly loved or admired person or thing.” Sorry. No blasphemy involved.

@Kropotkin What she warns about is actually happening. Your dismissal only makes sense if reality is irrelevant.

@flutherother It’s very reasonable to want both. But with corporatism and crony capitalism now gaining in the West, that may not be an option. The point is that is it isn’t an option, would you prefer to starve free of eat and let a central planning facility decide what foods are produced?

@ninjacolin Thank you so much for contributing the link.

The United States should put a moratorium on trade with China until they can put a stop to their most blatant and destructive counterfeit goods indusftry.

Nasty fakes offend, end careers as well as lives and cost legitimate manufacturers billions.

It makes me sick.

@SecondHandStoke The wonders of free trade. Eliminate crime by laying off all the cops and cancelling all laws. What could possibly go wrong. Sickens me too, but we still have a huge chorus here singing the praises of free-booting free-market perfection.

The production of knock offs doesn’t fall under the blanket of protection that is free trade.

Massive layoffs?

I vote for members of the TSA.

Stick that up your ass NSA.

@ETpro Actually, reality is important to me. Now, had she cited sources, presented properly labelled graphs, properly defined terms, and didn’t resort to vague labels and weasel-words—I may have taken her remotely seriously.

The vague references to the unnamed studies she made were evidence of nothing, since I couldn’t tell you if any were peer-reviewed, and any research would itself be subject to scrutiny and possibly reveal flaws. And polling Africans about their views of China? I actually laughed.

The biggest lie, however, was the claim about China’s decreasing inequality. Inequality rose dramatically through the 90s, until China stopped publishing their gini coefficient. The graph she presented was a joke—no proper units labelled, and even the figure given was rounded down rather generously to the nearest 5. It’ was at 0.474 in 2012, not 45, but I think there’s reason to take even this with a large pinch of salt—unless you think data coming out of China is completely credible. Consider that China’s gini coefficient had not been published annually at all. 2012 was the first time in 12 years, and they retrospectively published figures to fill in the previous years!

I had some issues with her little historical narrative about western prosperity and rights in the beginning of her video. (Too tired to go into why). Really, I could spend a lot longer critiquing her claims, but the subtext was too clear to me, and it’s what I mentioned previously, which you seemed to object to. I’ll try to elaborate:

They’re now all to happy to decouple the old myth of capitalism and freedom going hand in hand (surprised that one lingered as long as it did after the Chilean experiment) and are pushing authoritarian capitalism as a good model for other developing countries, with the old promises of wealth and prosperity, but maybe with one’s head under a boot from time to time, but that’s okay, because you can still eat and things!

Why do I think they’re pushing this model for developing countries? Not because it’s “reality”, not because it’s a good system, or even the only possible alternative (her bifurcation irked me too), but because forcing people off land and into urban slums provides cheap and expendable workers for western corporations to exploit—and the so-called “economic rights” are rights to pollute, and not having to deal with regulations and unions.

And the irony is is that this system needs her euphemistic “de-emphasised democracy” and “de-prioritised democratic system” to be forced on everyone. Oh. It’ll produce more billionaires at least.

Those shameless Chinese even produced a fake BMW X5.

BMW sued of course.

And fucking lost.

Copyright laws are SOCIALISM! A true free capitalist™ enterprise should not have to be burdened with socialist state imposed copyright laws.

Copyright laws are capitalism at it’s finest. They are all about personal property rights. There are no personal property rights with socialism. It all belongs to the Borg Collective, not the individual.

Nonsense. Laws are all imposed by the state.

Are you assuming that capitalism implies anarchy?

That is what the “invisible hand of the free market” is all about. capitalism is supposed to be self regulating, without any outside interference or imposition.

With counterfeit products being pumped out of China factories as fast as they can be produced it’s people need to learn a lesson or two about intellectual property, brand value and product safety.

“This Prada handbag looks like total shit, therefore It’s safe to assume it is.”

What do you expect from someone who was being dragged around by a plow mule in the distant hills just months ago?

APPLE is correctly obsessed with these things. They have a great opportunity to teach the Chinese to play Capitalist like grown ups.

It’s gonna take a LOT of work and time. but it must happen.

Knock off CRAP is as depressing as it is dangerous.

Counterfeit goods KILL.

The way things are going in the US now, I feel that central planning would be far more effective that our current system of representative government. Nothing is being accomplished; too much polarization and zealotry.

The US seems to be too heterogeneous to function any more. Unfortunately, central planning would require a revolution to implement.