China's Economic Rise

[Warenwolf]

Just how is there an economy in a communist country? So are there some people who make more money than other people, and some people who own business and others who work for the business

As one who has experienced communism (as a kid) I could tell you that theory and practice were two vastly different affairs. You also have to realize that communistic practice between two communist countries could be very different too.

Both Dragoongfa and Patholos have a somewhat simplified version of what communistic economy is. Just so we are clear I am not an expert either.

I lived in former Yugoslavia which no longer exist - due to communism partly but thats off topic.

We owned our own houses, cars and things like that. Farms were also privately owned but they were small - their size was restricted by government which then prevented a industrialization of the agriculture (because large companies couldn't be formed which is a requirement for modern industrialized agriculture).

Small businesses were also privately owned while large industrial magnates were government property (and highly inefficient). Schools, railroads and healthcare were government run (mostly efficiently I would say).

Was there people who earned more than others? Yeah, a doctor earned much more than a dockworker. Usually the people with low wages were provided with apartments where the rent was really low. Some companies provided their staff with apartments too.
However if you wanted to live like normal person you bought a house - apartments were really a minimum compared to European standards (in wealthier countries).
Banking system was crap and caused huge problems because of bad credits (sounds familiar?).
The main downside of the system was total lack of flexibility and the fact that communism and dictatorship walks hand in hand - so you end up with an inefficient economic system run by people solely interested in status quo.

In my opinion communism is good for a primitive country for a limited time period. But it is ultimately an ideological dead end.

[Lyth]

*Double Facepalm*

Pot-smoking, violent left wingers... really?

Any of the liberal euro communisms would pale at your comments and the original concepts of communism along with the christian social model actually called for the abolition of state and any control.

The Democratic Republic that America is has done a very successful job in hiding the origins of communism, the father of communism is also the founder of the modern day mechanism's of the House of Representatives and one of the greatest Free thinking Democratic Republicans the world has ever known, Plato.

[Aye Capn]

*Double Facepalm*

Pot-smoking, violent left wingers... really?

Altamont.

... the father of communism is also the founder of the modern day mechanism's of the House of Representatives and one of the greatest Free thinking Democratic Republicans the world has ever known, Plato.

Because as we all know Karl Marx was such a shameless plagiarist ...

Plato was actually a capitalist, and his references to thrift being a virtue proves it! Obviously Plato was so ahead of his time that macroeconomic issues were second nature to him.

I bet he also has a thing or two to say about interest rates and quantitative easing.

Or both of us could just be making all this up, one of us out of a wildly desperate and inappropriate need to find political allies in historical figures and the other out of his sense of duty to the noble calling of satire.

[ClearSky]

There should be a 'guffaw' emoticon, 'cause I could certainly use one after that last post!

Icky

[Lyth]

lol, not gonna say your claim is baseless but he was no capitalist but only in my opinion, such economic principles simply didn't exist at the time. Advocating temperence in all things only which I think was his point with Socrates.

Marx did base all his idea's on Plato's work but having read them I know they were incomplete. Plato had many idea's on working social models but having never read the works of Karl Marx I couldn't be specific regarding plagarism.

Poor satire but I appreciate the irreverance.
You can't change facts with a smile though.
Was Plato a capitalist? irrelevant, he still birthed the idea and still one the greatest Democratic Republicans in history.

<add/removed>

[Patholos]

*Double Facepalm*

Pot-smoking, violent left wingers... really?

I was referring to Blitz, a highly violent leftwing "organization" consisting of primarily stoners, squatters and selfemployed moralitypolice. I might add AFA to that list as well.


If twp persons disagrees over politics, what is the most prudent way to behave?

a) difference of opinion, but respect of right of free speech and opinion makes them agree to disagree

b) person A attacks person B because of differing opinions. Use of force to sway the other.

But that's OT.

[Lyth]

I'm not advocating communism but I gladly defend people's right to democratically select it and the faults I find with China have nothing to do with it being a communist state but how they chose to implement it.

Social models aren't evil, people are.

Regarding the Blitz thing, never heard of it/them but never met a Stoner that was violent... ever. Violent people that sometimes smoked sure but they aren't stoners. Sounds like something media hyped.

With the exception of only 1 or 2 things I agreed with the majority of your posts completely but Violent stoners I never will. The comment alone reminds me of "individuals" I once worked with that would relish beating up "Hippies" invoking their rights because they dared defend themelves when attacked then called them the aggressors.

If said groups are using violence to sway arguments then I can assure you it has nothing to do with any pot-smoking and they're just jerks, they sound like almost every established government on the planet to me.

[Tsar_of_Cows]

Social models aren't evil, people are.

More like "Social models aren't evil, but they can be wrong, and when they are, the consequences are a disaster". e.g. Communism.

Slightly more on topic, has anymore mentioned BRIC?

More on topic, there is a (probably correct) school of thought that the East, specifically China and Japan were world leaders in basically everything up until about 200-300 years ago. They were far more advanced than Europe, but were left behind by the industrial revolution because of their isolationist tendencies. What we're going to see is the centre of power shifting back to its original position as an industrialised China once again makes us look like a bunch of idiot yokels.

[amtct]

..... China once again makes us look like a bunch of idiot yokels.

My underwares are made in China .I don't know if that helps them

[Tsar_of_Cows]

..... China once again makes us look like a bunch of idiot yokels.

My underwares are made in China .I don't know if that helps them

Do they make you look like an idiot yokel? Or do you just blame them for it?

[amtct]

Do they make you look like an idiot yokel? Or do you just blame them for it?

I'll ruin their economy by not using underwares

[Dragoongfa]

I disagree

Japan was a fractured nation with warlords as its leaders for most of its history, when they managed to get themselves united they got their asses kicked by the Koreans with some help from the Chinese. Their greatest breakthroughs before their quite violent opening to the world were in the fields of metallurgy, culturally only bushido and the lifestyle around the samurais can be classified as cultural heritage.

The Chinese on the other hand, they were warring states until they were united in the second century BC, initially they were ahead of Rome but overall they were its equals, the problem was that China much like Rome always had the usual throne usurper and civil wars were frequent.

They never managed to completely unite until the European middle ages (around the time of the fall of the Byzantine Empire). Then its the only time when China was clearly ahead of everyone else for quite a few centuries.

So in short, they were ahead in technology but since they were never truly united until the 1400s they cannot claim that they were the top dog in the world.

[ClearSky]

There is very little in Japanese 'culture' that is not derived or distorted from Chinese culture.


People outside of the Far East seem to be largely ignorant of this, as was I.

Icky

[Lyth]

There is very little in Japanese 'culture' that is not derived or distorted from Chinese culture.

I have to disagree strongly with this, that's like saying the French & British were just distorted versions of one another. Each culture is unique and full of nuances.

Social models aren't evil, people are.

More like "Social models aren't evil, but they can be wrong, and when they are, the consequences are a disaster". e.g. Communism.

Fascism would be one I am far more comfortable arguing with in support of your argument and yet the closest thing to a perfect revolution in the last 50 years was in favour of a democratically selected Communism that saw no economic state control. Headlnes at the time included "The end of Capitalism in Europe!" but 1 year later everything was peaceful and business was better than ever.

China have always been one of the most powerful nations on the planet and incidently the only one any real good at secrecy.

[ClearSky]

Lyth

IcarusJones wrote:
There is very little in Japanese 'culture' that is not derived or distorted from Chinese culture.


I have to disagree strongly with this, that's like saying the French & British were just distorted versions of one another. Each culture is unique and full of nuances.

You can of course 'strongly disagree' as much as you like. Unfortunately there is nothing here for you to disagree with!

I didn't say that the Japanese culture didn't have nuances all of it's own, I said it was largely derived from Chinese culture.

Human beings are related to monkeys - oh, oh wait! I have to strongly disagree because it is sooo obvious that human beings and monkeys are unique and full of their own nuances.


Please read more carefully next time.

/semi serious leg pull mode off

Icky

[Lyth]

I will continue to disagree, doesn't mean I'm right but we'll save it for the next China/Japan thread.. I vill be vaitin'!

[Tsar_of_Cows]

So in short, they were ahead in technology but since they were never truly united until the 1400s they cannot claim that they were the top dog in the world.

I don't think I said anything about them being united,. for one thing, Europe has never been united and has always been covered in various powers vying for power. I was talking about technological, cultural, economic superiority. I'll grant that culture is harder to argue, but they clearly were ahead in technological and economic terms, despite the various wars.

[Aye Capn]

China was never "ahead" in economic theory, even if at certain times in history they were the wealthiest and for most of history the most technologically advanced.

What happened during the Industrial Revolution was unprecedented across the board in terms of technological development, economic development, and the advance of economic and political theory, and virtually all of these advances were made in Europe by the British and French. (The Germans and Americans largely dominated the Second Industrial Revolution, the coming of electricity, and America dominated the Age of Invention.)

Free markets and the free exchange of ideas were the catalyst that made the Modern Age out of old technologies from China -- paper and gunpowder especially -- mathematics and optics from the Arab world, and some key breakthroughs in metallurgy discovered by Europeans themselves in the rush to build better, cheaper cannons.

When Newcomen started using cannon barrels (conceptual cannon barrels) to harness the vacuum of condensing steam in order to pump water he was doing something no one else had ever done before, but that invention languished maybe 50 years before someone else picked it up and decided he would make it more efficient.

Of course you know by now I'm talking about James Watt, whose motive was to make money. By saving his potential customers on their coal costs Watt thought to make himself a fortune. He wound up changing the world possibly as much as any other individual ever has. He could never have done that had he not been free to follow his own pursuits in a culture that saw attaining personal wealth as a virtue, and he would never have done that had his customers not been free to pay him less than his competitor and pocket the difference themselves.

In China the virtue of the industrious lay in making high scores on the Imperial Exams in order to get a good job in government. There were no social rewards for innovators and no economic outlet for good ideas. So a few innovators would pop up who would come up with radically cool ideas like the mass produced Terra Cotta Warriors and those truly amazing water clock designs, but inventors never went anywhere with those ideas because there was no motive.

[amtct]

China was never "ahead" in economic theory, even if at certain times in history they were the wealthiest and for most of history the most technologically advanced.

China and NK ..heh...the inventors of warp drive and tehy even have God in a bottle

Someone please give me the definition of communist propaganda

[Tsar_of_Cows]

China was never "ahead" in economic theory, even if at certain times in history they were the wealthiest and for most of history the most technologically advanced.

What happened during the Industrial Revolution was unprecedented ...

But that's what I'm saying: China was ahead for over two thousand years, then Europe made a massive leap forward in about 200 years. What is happening now is a rebalancing - China was caught off guard and is now catching up, once it does it will be the dominant superpower.