China is Still Very Poor On Average....A Realistic Appraisal with Supporting Pics and Articles

Vernon North wrote:
In article om,
says...
China has 600 million consumers , not the 1 billion the other
people are talking about .

the other 600 million Chinese who live in the hill side has no
money .

But 600 million consumers are still good enough for any nation


RAK is also making the common mistake of passing opinion about a
snapshot in time rather than looking at the rate of change. There is a
reason why many intelligent, worldly Americans are concerned about the
emergence of China as a powerful economy. As Robert Rubin (former US
Secretary of the Treasury, now Chairman of CitiGroup) put it, the
emergence of China and India as modern economies may be the most
significant economic event since the emergence of the USA, or perhaps
even the industrial revolution. And Rubin has been criticized by some
American commentators of taking China too lightly.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/200...twoedged_sword
.php

China certainly has problems, some of them huge. But progress has been
stunningly fast over the past decade, and I can't see any reason why
that rate of improvement won't continue. For example, just 10 years ago
service quality in Chinese retail stores ranged between indifferent and
outright hostile. Now, the service in some Chinese retailers is at least
as good as the average American retail outlet. And the staff lap up
compliments about their service like hungry puppies, bending over
backwards to serve you even better! When was the last time you found
that in the USA?

RAK's posts about China sound more and more like American hubris. Or
maybe he's just trolling??

Verno

You're forgetting about Chinese Hubris, the Middle Kingdom Mentality.
I've quoted before this very readable article by an English/American
writer (with a Chinese wife I believe) for National Review - read it in
full to understand just what many mainland Chinese really think!!

http://www.vdare.com/derbyshire/sino-fascism.htm

As for Rubin, he wrote: "Finally, regulation should provide constraints
where markets fail to reflect externalities, but those constraints must
be based on risk/reward calculations. Thus, effective environmental
protection should be recognized as a long-term economic imperative as
well as a value in itself, but restraint should be proportionate to the
benefits, however difficult measuring those benefits often is." Well,
China for one doesn't seem to care about negative externalities:
pollution. Didn't you read that in so many days Hong Kong is under a
cover of smog and one of the kids of a prominant businessman (or was it
director of stock exchange or something) was advised by a doctor to go
to the Phillippines because of asthma concerns or something similar?
In fact you quoted an article on the effects of pollution from China
can be felt in the US as well - not unexpected as China has way more
people and pollution will likely increase in the future.

A related article from your "progressive" website:
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/200...ust_change.php

"China is the poster child for export-led manufacturing growth. It has
the most undervalued exchange rate, the worst labor repression, and is
by far the largest developing country exporter. As such, China is the
gravitational attractor for the race to the bottom. Other countries
must change too, but they can only do so if China changes so that none
lose relative competitive advantage. If China revalues its exchange
rate, other East Asian countries can also do so. Likewise, if China
raises wages, so too can others.

One area where China is showing leadership is its stated commitment to
increase social spending. This will be good for China's citizenry,
and it will also contribute to incomes and domestic demand in China,
which will be good for the global economy. However, there is also a
problem that is unique to China. Labor standards and trade unions are
key to domestic market-led development, but China's political system
prevents them. That creates an additional political roadblock that must
be solved. Democratic reform in China is not a nicety. It is a
necessity for the global economy to work."

See, the CCP/China's political system stinks! But oh no, dissent in
China may mean death and torture or harvesting of organs!!

And there are lots more which you previously touched on in another
thread - intellectual property rights etc etc. China rips off other
peoples' ideas shamelessly (posted before - those Chinese cars look
like a pastische of Ford and Lexus with a BMW taillight etc etc), with
all these illegal DVDs, VCDs that you see in Chinatown etc. Many
mainland Chinese have been indoctrinated with a parasitic mentality by
the communist government - if I don't make it the world owes me etc etc.

In article .com,
says...

Vernon North wrote:
In article om,
says...
China has 600 million consumers , not the 1 billion the other
people are talking about .

the other 600 million Chinese who live in the hill side has no
money .

But 600 million consumers are still good enough for any nation


RAK is also making the common mistake of passing opinion about a
snapshot in time rather than looking at the rate of change. There is a
reason why many intelligent, worldly Americans are concerned about the
emergence of China as a powerful economy. As Robert Rubin (former US
Secretary of the Treasury, now Chairman of CitiGroup) put it, the
emergence of China and India as modern economies may be the most
significant economic event since the emergence of the USA, or perhaps
even the industrial revolution. And Rubin has been criticized by some
American commentators of taking China too lightly.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/200...twoedged_sword
.php

China certainly has problems, some of them huge. But progress has been
stunningly fast over the past decade, and I can't see any reason why
that rate of improvement won't continue. For example, just 10 years ago
service quality in Chinese retail stores ranged between indifferent and
outright hostile. Now, the service in some Chinese retailers is at least
as good as the average American retail outlet. And the staff lap up
compliments about their service like hungry puppies, bending over
backwards to serve you even better! When was the last time you found
that in the USA?

RAK's posts about China sound more and more like American hubris. Or
maybe he's just trolling??

Verno

You're forgetting about Chinese Hubris, the Middle Kingdom Mentality.

Not at all -- I know it all too well. But trace the trajectory. China
is catching up, and FAST.

I've quoted before this very readable article by an English/American
writer (with a Chinese wife I believe) for National Review - read it in
full to understand just what many mainland Chinese really think!!

http://www.vdare.com/derbyshire/sino-fascism.htm

None of this is a surprise to me, but you are ignoring the rate of
progress China is making -- like picking out flaws in a paused frame
instead of watching where the movie is going.

As for Rubin, he wrote: "Finally, regulation should provide constraints
where markets fail to reflect externalities, but those constraints must
be based on risk/reward calculations. Thus, effective environmental
protection should be recognized as a long-term economic imperative as
well as a value in itself, but restraint should be proportionate to the
benefits, however difficult measuring those benefits often is." Well,
China for one doesn't seem to care about negative externalities:
pollution. Didn't you read that in so many days Hong Kong is under a
cover of smog and one of the kids of a prominant businessman (or was it
director of stock exchange or something) was advised by a doctor to go
to the Phillippines because of asthma concerns or something similar?
In fact you quoted an article on the effects of pollution from China
can be felt in the US as well - not unexpected as China has way more
people and pollution will likely increase in the future.

The pollution in China is terrible, no doubt about it. And it has
****ed off many in HK -- but they should be equally ****ed off at HK
based businesses, many of which have interests in China, and very few of
which have effective pollution control in their Chinese properties.
Again, what you're saying is true, but it ignores where this "movie" is
headed.

A related article from your "progressive" website:



http://www.tompaine.com/articles/200...ust_change.php


"China is the poster child for export-led manufacturing growth. It has
the most undervalued exchange rate, the worst labor repression, and is
by far the largest developing country exporter. As such, China is the
gravitational attractor for the race to the bottom. Other countries
must change too, but they can only do so if China changes so that none
lose relative competitive advantage. If China revalues its exchange
rate, other East Asian countries can also do so. Likewise, if China
raises wages, so too can others.

One area where China is showing leadership is its stated commitment to
increase social spending. This will be good for China's citizenry,
and it will also contribute to incomes and domestic demand in China,
which will be good for the global economy. However, there is also a
problem that is unique to China. Labor standards and trade unions are
key to domestic market-led development, but China's political system
prevents them. That creates an additional political roadblock that must
be solved. Democratic reform in China is not a nicety. It is a
necessity for the global economy to work."

See, the CCP/China's political system stinks! But oh no, dissent in
China may mean death and torture or harvesting of organs!!

And there are lots more which you previously touched on in another
thread - intellectual property rights etc etc. China rips off other
peoples' ideas shamelessly (posted before - those Chinese cars look
like a pastische of Ford and Lexus with a BMW taillight etc etc), with
all these illegal DVDs, VCDs that you see in Chinatown etc. Many
mainland Chinese have been indoctrinated with a parasitic mentality by
the communist government - if I don't make it the world owes me etc etc.

Yep, all true. But I draw a very different conclusion than you.

Driving habits in China are a metaphor for Chinese business.

Nobody pays any attention to the laws unless the police are watching.
All they care about is getting where they want to go as quickly as
possible. Even the prospect of vehicle damage doesn't deter what we
would call "bad" driving. The traffic lights and the lines separating
lanes mean nothing. Drive wherever you can! Honk if someone is
obstructing you, or even if they may stray into your path. But get
there, FAST! And if you happen to hit another car in the process, drive
away to avoid responsibility!

My conclusion is that China's "race to the bottom" may turn out to be a
superior formula for economic success. The "first world" countries are
rapidly fading into the sunset, driven IMHO by their commitment to
democracy, which leads inevitably to a decision to emancipate women.
Emancipated women breed at rates well below population replacement. The
cultures that have made this social change may think of themselves as
being "superior", but they're made social changes that have destined
them for the dustbin of history.

China certainly has its warts, and there's a lot to smirk at when you
view it through the lens of a western democracy. But I'll bet the
Chinese will have the last laugh.

Verno

On Jan 23, 8:29 pm, Vernon North Vernon wrote:
In article .com,
says...





Vernon North wrote:
In article om,
says...
China has 600 million consumers , not the 1 billion the other
people are talking about .

the other 600 million Chinese who live in the hill side has no
money .

But 600 million consumers are still good enough for any nation

RAK is also making the common mistake of passing opinion about a
snapshot in time rather than looking at the rate of change. There is a
reason why many intelligent, worldly Americans are concerned about the
emergence of China as a powerful economy. As Robert Rubin (former US
Secretary of the Treasury, now Chairman of CitiGroup) put it, the
emergence of China and India as modern economies may be the most
significant economic event since the emergence of the USA, or perhaps
even the industrial revolution. And Rubin has been criticized by some
American commentators of taking China too lightly.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/200...twoedged_sword
.php

China certainly has problems, some of them huge. But progress has been
stunningly fast over the past decade, and I can't see any reason why
that rate of improvement won't continue. For example, just 10 years ago
service quality in Chinese retail stores ranged between indifferent and
outright hostile. Now, the service in some Chinese retailers is at least
as good as the average American retail outlet. And the staff lap up
compliments about their service like hungry puppies, bending over
backwards to serve you even better! When was the last time you found
that in the USA?

RAK's posts about China sound more and more like American hubris. Or
maybe he's just trolling??

Verno

You're forgetting about Chinese Hubris, the Middle Kingdom Mentality.Not at all -- I know it all too well. But trace the trajectory. China
is catching up, and FAST.


Yes, the trajectory. That's big IF. Will Hutton has just written a book
on this The Writing on the Wall. This trajectory may well be
non-linear. In a debate he wrote:

"It is a commonplace to observe that the rise of China is transforming
the world. Extrapolate from current growth rates and China will be the
world's largest economy by the middle of this century, if not before.
If it remains communist, the impact on the world system will be
enormous and very damaging. Britain and the US are, for all their
faults, democracies that accept the rule of law. This is not true of
China. If an unreformed China takes its place at the top table, the
global order will be kinder to despotism; the fragile emergence of an
international system of governance based on the rule of law will be set
back and the relations between states will depend even more nakedly on
their relative power.

All that, however, is predicated on two very big "ifs"-if the current
Chinese growth rate continues, and if the country remains communist. I
think there are substantial doubts about each proposition. What is
certain is that both cannot hold. China is reaching the limits of the
sustainability of its current model, and to extrapolate from the past
into the future as if nothing needs to change is a first-order
mistake."

So that's the million $ question - will China's growth rates continue?
Is it sustainable?

Here's another review: - with some excerpts:
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech...ized_china.htm

"China has made the transition from a planned economy to a more
market-based economy, has joined the World Trade Organization, and is
so obviously successful that the magic ingredient must be its
commitment to markets, the profit motive and private property. ... But
the reality is more complex. ... This is an economy and society over
which the party seeks and so far has maintained extensive direct and
indirect control despite a broad liberalization of prices, a rollback
of planning, a boom in foreign direct investment, and substantial
autonomy among all forms of enterprise. ... China is half pregnant and
that is the way the party intends to keep it."

"Welfare systems, freedom of association, representative government,
and enforceable property rights are not simply pleasant options. They
are central to the capacity for a capitalist economy to grow to
maturity. ... The current halfway house of trying to retain political
control of what is in truth only half a market economy is
unsustainable. ... China has few great companies capable of competing
internationally and almost no global brands. Its private sector
consists of a plethora of small transient companies usually dependent
on political patronage. China's state-owned, state-directed companies,
or state-influenced companies may have the freedom to set prices and
wages, but only within the limits laid down by the party. Their
productivity is disastrous."

In a world that's increasingly fluid, where the only constant is
change, the past may not always map out the future 1:1.


I've quoted before this very readable article by an English/American
writer (with a Chinese wife I believe) for National Review - read it in
full to understand just what many mainland Chinese really think!!

http://www.vdare.com/derbyshire/sino-fascism.htmNone of this is a surprise to me, but you are ignoring the rate of
progress China is making -- like picking out flaws in a paused frame
instead of watching where the movie is going.



See above - the problem lies with the extrapolation and no one really
knows what it will be.

And one more point about trajectory: Here. It will take a very long
time for China to reach the level of a developed country *EVEN IF* the
trajectory continues - and this is very uncertain and in fact may not
continue ( Hutton above).

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/5603/gdpindex4jl.gif

* * China in 2025-2030 will only be like Japan in 1961 !!!!! * *


And the longer you peer into the future, the more uncertainties come
into play.

Driving habits in China are a metaphor for Chinese business.

Nobody pays any attention to the laws unless the police are watching.
All they care about is getting where they want to go as quickly as
possible. Even the prospect of vehicle damage doesn't deter what we
would call "bad" driving. The traffic lights and the lines separating
lanes mean nothing. Drive wherever you can! Honk if someone is
obstructing you, or even if they may stray into your path. But get
there, FAST! And if you happen to hit another car in the process, drive
away to avoid responsibility!


But we all know just how crappy Chinese drivers are. To remind you:

Chinese Traffic Style
http://aperifle.sinosplice.com/uploa...jam-713465.jpg

Chinese Driver Runs Over Pedestrian
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQMsW4zNDFI


My conclusion is that China's "race to the bottom" may turn out to be a
superior formula for economic success. The "first world" countries are
rapidly fading into the sunset, driven IMHO by their commitment to
democracy, which leads inevitably to a decision to emancipate women.
Emancipated women breed at rates well below population replacement. The
cultures that have made this social change may think of themselves as
being "superior", but they're made social changes that have destined
them for the dustbin of history.

China certainly has its warts, and there's a lot to smirk at when you
view it through the lens of a western democracy. But I'll bet the
Chinese will have the last laugh.

Verno

You're right in that feminism bit - in fact as you probably read in
Buchanan's Death of The West he did identify feminism as a factor of
decline of the West - demographic collapse and all the DINKS - but
also the importation of third world invasion and conquest of America,
especially with regards to Hispanics. Hmmmm, as side point, will Hong
Kong, the highest net worth "country" in the world by PPP and 2nd
highest after Japan by US exchange rates, decline as well especially
with the invasion of hordes and hordes of pregnant women from the
mainland who abuse the system face a similar fate, now that it has the
lowest fertility rates in the world and is being invaded by third world
pregnant mainland Chinese moms?
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=hk&v=31

As for a suicidal ideology, democracy by itself should not bring about
a society's demise - it's the doctrine of equality of rights that's
being perverted to equality of outcome - i.e. egalitarianism. Think
back: how many people have communism slaughtered and murdered? Even in
its milder form, modern liberalism, with welfare statist policies etc,
with "no child left behind act" etc, the underlying assumption of
egalitarianism is unmistakable. So what does have to do with feminism?
Everything! Biological restraints become taboo and discussion of it is
being seen as 'prejudice'. Hence the antipathy of a genetic component
on human behavior (e.g. IQ) - and women really are indoctrinated to
think they are equal to men in every way. In some cases it may bring
benefits to men -- logically they should have more sex, "look, if you
can sleep around, I can do it too!" but in reality that's actually not
the case as they really hate men or are closet lesbians. And they view
childbearing as being subservient etc etc. I wouldn't say democracy
causes a decline in birth rates, although materialism can as people
indulge themselves in the present (again see Buchanan) rather than
think for the future, and certainly this vague and undefinable idea of
"egalitarianism". And when you violate this taboo (e.g. Harvard
president) you'll be excommunicated in the bastions of socialism in
higher ed.

In article .com,
says...


On Jan 23, 8:29 pm, Vernon North Vernon wrote:
In article .com,
says...





Vernon North wrote:
In article om,
says...
China has 600 million consumers , not the 1 billion the other
people are talking about .

the other 600 million Chinese who live in the hill side has no
money .

But 600 million consumers are still good enough for any nation

RAK is also making the common mistake of passing opinion about a
snapshot in time rather than looking at the rate of change. There is a
reason why many intelligent, worldly Americans are concerned about the
emergence of China as a powerful economy. As Robert Rubin (former US
Secretary of the Treasury, now Chairman of CitiGroup) put it, the
emergence of China and India as modern economies may be the most
significant economic event since the emergence of the USA, or perhaps
even the industrial revolution. And Rubin has been criticized by some
American commentators of taking China too lightly.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/200...twoedged_sword
.php

China certainly has problems, some of them huge. But progress has been
stunningly fast over the past decade, and I can't see any reason why
that rate of improvement won't continue. For example, just 10 years ago
service quality in Chinese retail stores ranged between indifferent and
outright hostile. Now, the service in some Chinese retailers is at least
as good as the average American retail outlet. And the staff lap up
compliments about their service like hungry puppies, bending over
backwards to serve you even better! When was the last time you found
that in the USA?

RAK's posts about China sound more and more like American hubris. Or
maybe he's just trolling??

Verno

You're forgetting about Chinese Hubris, the Middle Kingdom Mentality.Not at all -- I know it all too well. But trace the trajectory. China
is catching up, and FAST.


Yes, the trajectory. That's big IF.

And you're betting against it, right?

Will Hutton has just written a book
on this The Writing on the Wall. This trajectory may well be
non-linear.

Of course it will be non-linear!

In a debate he wrote:

"It is a commonplace to observe that the rise of China is transforming
the world. Extrapolate from current growth rates and China will be the
world's largest economy by the middle of this century, if not before.
If it remains communist, the impact on the world system will be
enormous and very damaging.

IF???? That's laughable. It isn't communist NOW in anything but name.

Britain and the US are, for all their
faults, democracies that accept the rule of law. This is not true of
China.

So simplistic I have to laugh. The powers in China accept the rule of
law as much as the powers in our democracies.

If an unreformed China takes its place at the top table, the
global order will be kinder to despotism; the fragile emergence of an
international system of governance based on the rule of law will be set
back and the relations between states will depend even more nakedly on
their relative power.

And this was written by a citizen a law-abiding country that respects
international governance and the rule of law? Which country is that,
anyway??

All that, however, is predicated on two very big "ifs"-if the current
Chinese growth rate continues, and if the country remains communist.

See above.

I
think there are substantial doubts about each proposition. What is
certain is that both cannot hold. China is reaching the limits of the
sustainability of its current model, and to extrapolate from the past
into the future as if nothing needs to change is a first-order
mistake."

So that's the million $ question - will China's growth rates continue?
Is it sustainable?

Many capitalists are betting it is -- including a lot of American
capitalists.

Here's another review: - with some excerpts:
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech...ized_china.htm

"China has made the transition from a planned economy to a more
market-based economy, has joined the World Trade Organization, and is
so obviously successful that the magic ingredient must be its
commitment to markets, the profit motive and private property. ... But
the reality is more complex. ... This is an economy and society over
which the party seeks and so far has maintained extensive direct and
indirect control despite a broad liberalization of prices, a rollback
of planning, a boom in foreign direct investment, and substantial
autonomy among all forms of enterprise. ... China is half pregnant and
that is the way the party intends to keep it."

"Welfare systems, freedom of association, representative government,
and enforceable property rights are not simply pleasant options. They
are central to the capacity for a capitalist economy to grow to
maturity. ...

At least that's the common wisdom. But nobody has seen a model like
this one before.

The current halfway house of trying to retain political
control of what is in truth only half a market economy is
unsustainable. ... China has few great companies capable of competing
internationally and almost no global brands. Its private sector
consists of a plethora of small transient companies usually dependent
on political patronage.

And they're taking over markets everywhere.

China's state-owned, state-directed companies,
or state-influenced companies may have the freedom to set prices and
wages, but only within the limits laid down by the party. Their
productivity is disastrous."

In a world that's increasingly fluid, where the only constant is
change, the past may not always map out the future 1:1.

My point exactly. That's why those who laugh up their sleeves at China
-- always for the past and the present (which becomes the past tomorrow)
-- are indulging in the most dangerous kind of rear-view-mirror-gazing
hubris of underestimating the competition. That's a fool's game.


I've quoted before this very readable article by an English/American
writer (with a Chinese wife I believe) for National Review - read it in
full to understand just what many mainland Chinese really think!!

http://www.vdare.com/derbyshire/sino-fascism.htmNone of this is a surprise to me, but you are ignoring the rate of
progress China is making -- like picking out flaws in a paused frame
instead of watching where the movie is going.



See above - the problem lies with the extrapolation and no one really
knows what it will be.

And one more point about trajectory: Here. It will take a very long
time for China to reach the level of a developed country *EVEN IF* the
trajectory continues - and this is very uncertain and in fact may not
continue ( Hutton above).

It doesn't have to reach the level of a developed country to kick the
props out from under the economies of many developed countries.

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/5603/gdpindex4jl.gif

* * China in 2025-2030 will only be like Japan in 1961 !!!!! * *


And the longer you peer into the future, the more uncertainties come
into play.

Driving habits in China are a metaphor for Chinese business.

Nobody pays any attention to the laws unless the police are watching.
All they care about is getting where they want to go as quickly as
possible. Even the prospect of vehicle damage doesn't deter what we
would call "bad" driving. The traffic lights and the lines separating
lanes mean nothing. Drive wherever you can! Honk if someone is
obstructing you, or even if they may stray into your path. But get
there, FAST! And if you happen to hit another car in the process, drive
away to avoid responsibility!


But we all know just how crappy Chinese drivers are. To remind you:

Having recently returned from China, I don't need any reminders.


My conclusion is that China's "race to the bottom" may turn out to be a
superior formula for economic success. The "first world" countries are
rapidly fading into the sunset, driven IMHO by their commitment to
democracy, which leads inevitably to a decision to emancipate women.
Emancipated women breed at rates well below population replacement. The
cultures that have made this social change may think of themselves as
being "superior", but they're made social changes that have destined
them for the dustbin of history.

China certainly has its warts, and there's a lot to smirk at when you
view it through the lens of a western democracy. But I'll bet the
Chinese will have the last laugh.

Verno

You're right in that feminism bit - in fact as you probably read in
Buchanan's Death of The West he did identify feminism as a factor of
decline of the West - demographic collapse and all the DINKS - but
also the importation of third world invasion and conquest of America,
especially with regards to Hispanics. Hmmmm, as side point, will Hong
Kong, the highest net worth "country" in the world by PPP and 2nd
highest after Japan by US exchange rates, decline as well especially
with the invasion of hordes and hordes of pregnant women from the
mainland who abuse the system face a similar fate, now that it has the
lowest fertility rates in the world and is being invaded by third world
pregnant mainland Chinese moms?
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=hk&v=31

HK has always found a way to prosper from its position on the edge of
China. HK made a living by dipping its spoon into the river of gold
flowing in and out of China, and it's finding new ways to do that as the
"river" changes course and content. HK won't be THE centre it once was,
but HKers are busy ensuring their future and, I think, doing a good job
of that -- pregnant PRC moms notwithstanding.

As for a suicidal ideology, democracy by itself should not bring about
a society's demise - it's the doctrine of equality of rights that's
being perverted to equality of outcome - i.e. egalitarianism.

It's simpler than that. Emancipation of women is a natural development
of democracy, and as is some form of egalitarianism. The one that is
the death knell for a society is the one that halts breeding. And that
isn't egalitarianism.

Verno

egalitarianism is unnatural. Ends evolution.

"Vernon North" Vernon wrote in message
ble.net...
In article .com,
says...


On Jan 23, 8:29 pm, Vernon North Vernon wrote:
In article .com,
says...





Vernon North wrote:
In article om,
says...
China has 600 million consumers , not the 1 billion the
other
people are talking about .

the other 600 million Chinese who live in the hill side has
no
money .

But 600 million consumers are still good enough for any
nation

RAK is also making the common mistake of passing opinion about a
snapshot in time rather than looking at the rate of change. There
is a
reason why many intelligent, worldly Americans are concerned about
the
emergence of China as a powerful economy. As Robert Rubin (former
US
Secretary of the Treasury, now Chairman of CitiGroup) put it, the
emergence of China and India as modern economies may be the most
significant economic event since the emergence of the USA, or
perhaps
even the industrial revolution. And Rubin has been criticized by
some
American commentators of taking China too lightly.


http://www.tompaine.com/articles/200...twoedged_sword
.php

China certainly has problems, some of them huge. But progress has
been
stunningly fast over the past decade, and I can't see any reason
why
that rate of improvement won't continue. For example, just 10
years ago
service quality in Chinese retail stores ranged between
indifferent and
outright hostile. Now, the service in some Chinese retailers is at
least
as good as the average American retail outlet. And the staff lap
up
compliments about their service like hungry puppies, bending over
backwards to serve you even better! When was the last time you
found
that in the USA?

RAK's posts about China sound more and more like American hubris.
Or
maybe he's just trolling??

Verno

You're forgetting about Chinese Hubris, the Middle Kingdom
Mentality.Not at all -- I know it all too well. But trace the trajectory.
China
is catching up, and FAST.


Yes, the trajectory. That's big IF.

And you're betting against it, right?

Will Hutton has just written a book
on this The Writing on the Wall. This trajectory may well be
non-linear.

Of course it will be non-linear!

In a debate he wrote:

"It is a commonplace to observe that the rise of China is transforming
the world. Extrapolate from current growth rates and China will be the
world's largest economy by the middle of this century, if not before.
If it remains communist, the impact on the world system will be
enormous and very damaging.

IF???? That's laughable. It isn't communist NOW in anything but name.

Britain and the US are, for all their
faults, democracies that accept the rule of law. This is not true of
China.

So simplistic I have to laugh. The powers in China accept the rule of
law as much as the powers in our democracies.

If an unreformed China takes its place at the top table, the
global order will be kinder to despotism; the fragile emergence of an
international system of governance based on the rule of law will be set
back and the relations between states will depend even more nakedly on
their relative power.

And this was written by a citizen a law-abiding country that respects
international governance and the rule of law? Which country is that,
anyway??

All that, however, is predicated on two very big "ifs"-if the current
Chinese growth rate continues, and if the country remains communist.

See above.

I
think there are substantial doubts about each proposition. What is
certain is that both cannot hold. China is reaching the limits of the
sustainability of its current model, and to extrapolate from the past
into the future as if nothing needs to change is a first-order
mistake."

So that's the million $ question - will China's growth rates continue?
Is it sustainable?

Many capitalists are betting it is -- including a lot of American
capitalists.

Here's another review: - with some excerpts:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech...tting_on_a_lib
eralized_china.htm

"China has made the transition from a planned economy to a more
market-based economy, has joined the World Trade Organization, and is
so obviously successful that the magic ingredient must be its
commitment to markets, the profit motive and private property. ... But
the reality is more complex. ... This is an economy and society over
which the party seeks and so far has maintained extensive direct and
indirect control despite a broad liberalization of prices, a rollback
of planning, a boom in foreign direct investment, and substantial
autonomy among all forms of enterprise. ... China is half pregnant and
that is the way the party intends to keep it."

"Welfare systems, freedom of association, representative government,
and enforceable property rights are not simply pleasant options. They
are central to the capacity for a capitalist economy to grow to
maturity. ...

At least that's the common wisdom. But nobody has seen a model like
this one before.

The current halfway house of trying to retain political
control of what is in truth only half a market economy is
unsustainable. ... China has few great companies capable of competing
internationally and almost no global brands. Its private sector
consists of a plethora of small transient companies usually dependent
on political patronage.

And they're taking over markets everywhere.

China's state-owned, state-directed companies,
or state-influenced companies may have the freedom to set prices and
wages, but only within the limits laid down by the party. Their
productivity is disastrous."

In a world that's increasingly fluid, where the only constant is
change, the past may not always map out the future 1:1.

My point exactly. That's why those who laugh up their sleeves at China
-- always for the past and the present (which becomes the past tomorrow)
-- are indulging in the most dangerous kind of rear-view-mirror-gazing
hubris of underestimating the competition. That's a fool's game.


I've quoted before this very readable article by an English/American
writer (with a Chinese wife I believe) for National Review - read it
in
full to understand just what many mainland Chinese really think!!

http://www.vdare.com/derbyshire/sino-fascism.htmNone of this is a
surprise to me, but you are ignoring the rate of
progress China is making -- like picking out flaws in a paused frame
instead of watching where the movie is going.



See above - the problem lies with the extrapolation and no one really
knows what it will be.

And one more point about trajectory: Here. It will take a very long
time for China to reach the level of a developed country *EVEN IF* the
trajectory continues - and this is very uncertain and in fact may not
continue ( Hutton above).

It doesn't have to reach the level of a developed country to kick the
props out from under the economies of many developed countries.

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/5603/gdpindex4jl.gif

* * China in 2025-2030 will only be like Japan in 1961 !!!!! * *


And the longer you peer into the future, the more uncertainties come
into play.

Driving habits in China are a metaphor for Chinese business.

Nobody pays any attention to the laws unless the police are watching.
All they care about is getting where they want to go as quickly as
possible. Even the prospect of vehicle damage doesn't deter what we
would call "bad" driving. The traffic lights and the lines separating
lanes mean nothing. Drive wherever you can! Honk if someone is
obstructing you, or even if they may stray into your path. But get
there, FAST! And if you happen to hit another car in the process,
drive
away to avoid responsibility!


But we all know just how crappy Chinese drivers are. To remind you:

Having recently returned from China, I don't need any reminders.


My conclusion is that China's "race to the bottom" may turn out to be
a
superior formula for economic success. The "first world" countries
are
rapidly fading into the sunset, driven IMHO by their commitment to
democracy, which leads inevitably to a decision to emancipate women.
Emancipated women breed at rates well below population replacement.
The
cultures that have made this social change may think of themselves as
being "superior", but they're made social changes that have destined
them for the dustbin of history.

China certainly has its warts, and there's a lot to smirk at when you
view it through the lens of a western democracy. But I'll bet the
Chinese will have the last laugh.

Verno

You're right in that feminism bit - in fact as you probably read in
Buchanan's Death of The West he did identify feminism as a factor of
decline of the West - demographic collapse and all the DINKS - but
also the importation of third world invasion and conquest of America,
especially with regards to Hispanics. Hmmmm, as side point, will Hong
Kong, the highest net worth "country" in the world by PPP and 2nd
highest after Japan by US exchange rates, decline as well especially
with the invasion of hordes and hordes of pregnant women from the
mainland who abuse the system face a similar fate, now that it has the
lowest fertility rates in the world and is being invaded by third world
pregnant mainland Chinese moms?
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=hk&v=31

HK has always found a way to prosper from its position on the edge of
China. HK made a living by dipping its spoon into the river of gold
flowing in and out of China, and it's finding new ways to do that as the
"river" changes course and content. HK won't be THE centre it once was,
but HKers are busy ensuring their future and, I think, doing a good job
of that -- pregnant PRC moms notwithstanding.

As for a suicidal ideology, democracy by itself should not bring about
a society's demise - it's the doctrine of equality of rights that's
being perverted to equality of outcome - i.e. egalitarianism.

It's simpler than that. Emancipation of women is a natural development
of democracy, and as is some form of egalitarianism. The one that is
the death knell for a society is the one that halts breeding. And that
isn't egalitarianism.

Verno

On Jan 24, 1:40 am, Vernon North Vernon wrote:
In article .com,
says...


You're forgetting about Chinese Hubris, the Middle Kingdom Mentality.Not at all -- I know it all too well. But trace the trajectory. China
is catching up, and FAST.

Yes, the trajectory. That's big IF.
And you're betting against it, right?

I favor realism - reminder!!! Exactly the title of this thread!! See
for instance this report - China, India Superpower? Not so Fast!
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6407

Likewise I concur with Singapore's Lee Kwan Yew's realism where he said
something like this in the recent past:
"What is gradually happening is the restoration of the world balance to
what it was in the early 19th century or late 18th century when China
and India together were responsible for more than 40 percent of world
GDP. With those two countries becoming part of the globalized trading
world, they are going to go back to approximately the level of world
GDP that they previously occupied. But that doesn't make them the
superpowers of the world."





Britain and the US are, for all their
faults, democracies that accept the rule of law. This is not true of
China.

So simplistic I have to laugh. The powers in China accept the rule of
law as much as the powers in our democracies.

Actually it's the average guy who accepts the rule of law perhaps. The
powers of China? According to Wikipedia (modified Jan 2007) when you
type in the terms China and rule of law, "In the Anglo-American legal
tradition rule of law has been seen as a guard against despotism and as
enforcing limitations on the power of the government. In the People's
Republic of China the discourse around rule of law centers on the
notion that laws ultimately enhance the power of the state and the
nation, which is why the Chinese government adopts the principle of
rule BY law rather than rule OF law."

Another article from ATimes concludes,

"However, in China, there is a problem when the law meets authority. If
a case arises between two normal people, then the law is somewhat
powerful. But if one person is a company official or from the
government, then **there is no power in the law.** Business people know
that if they have bought political backing, they can get investigations
into their affairs called off and stories in the state media killed (8,
9). (my emphasis)

Despite reams of laws written by Beijing over the past two decades, one
prominent foreign lawyer in China believes the rule of law has actually
weakened. By 1997, she says, she encountered Chinese judges who wanted
to build a truly fair legal system. But in 2000, the Communist Party
quietly instructed courts to consider the nation's interests first and
moved independent-minded justices out of power (10).

Worsening the rule of law in China is the fact that many in China see
smuggling, bribes and piracy as victimless crimes, and thus tolerated.
(Bribes and success mean almost the same thing.) The gap in perceptions
highlights the difficulties the Chinese government faces as it tries to
curb corruption. As China is becoming a leading global trading partner,
the lack of law among the government and the citizens is also becoming
an important problem worldwide. This problem must not be ignored. "

You should at least accept that 'gifts' are often necessary to do
business in China? Even you said something similar before, I believe!
No wonder in the perceptions (your fav subject?) of corruption index,
China is ranked so very very low compared to Singapore, Hong Kong,
Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, US etc etc!!
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html



In a world that's increasingly fluid, where the only constant is
change, the past may not always map out the future 1:1.

My point exactly. That's why those who laugh up their sleeves at China
-- always for the past and the present (which becomes the past tomorrow)
-- are indulging in the most dangerous kind of rear-view-mirror-gazing
hubris of underestimating the competition. That's a fool's game.

Again I favor realism - title of this thread, with articles quoted
above. Even you admitted the whole slew of problems in mainland China.
And if reality is so fluid, the past is probably much less predictive
of the future.






I've quoted before this very readable article by an English/American
writer (with a Chinese wife I believe) for National Review - read it in
full to understand just what many mainland Chinese really think!!

http://www.vdare.com/derbyshire/sino-fascism.htmNoneof this is a surprise to me, but you are ignoring the rate of
progress China is making -- like picking out flaws in a paused frame
instead of watching where the movie is going.

See above - the problem lies with the extrapolation and no one really
knows what it will be.

And one more point about trajectory: Here. It will take a very long
time for China to reach the level of a developed country *EVEN IF* the
trajectory continues - and this is very uncertain and in fact may not
continue ( Hutton above).
It doesn't have to reach the level of a developed country to kick the
props out from under the economies of many developed countries.

From the OP I explicitly said this was more a cultural post - looking
at the average guy in China, reflection of what things are really like,
rather than from an international business perspective. What you said
may be true with all the copying and pirating among other things from
China, of course, but that's due to China's sheer numbers, and not per
capita merit (WRT above discussion obviously most rules can be bent at
the top, not just for China but for other countries as well) - the per
capita point is very shocking: compared to the US, the GDP of China
even in an optimistic projection in 2020 is not yet even the relative
level of Japan compared to the US in 1960!! The per capita part is
important because it addresses how the average mainland Chinese lives.
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/5603/gdpindex4jl.gif


You're right in that feminism bit - in fact as you probably read in
Buchanan's Death of The West he did identify feminism as a factor of
decline of the West - demographic collapse and all the DINKS - but
also the importation of third world invasion and conquest of America,
especially with regards to Hispanics. Hmmmm, as side point, will Hong
Kong, the highest net worth "country" in the world by PPP and 2nd
highest after Japan by US exchange rates, decline as well especially
with the invasion of hordes and hordes of pregnant women from the
mainland who abuse the system face a similar fate, now that it has the
lowest fertility rates in the world and is being invaded by third world
pregnant mainland Chinese moms?
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=hk&v=31

You wrote:
"HK has always found a way to prosper from its position on the edge of
China. HK made a living by dipping its spoon into the river of gold
flowing in and out of China, and it's finding new ways to do that as
the
"river" changes course and content. HK won't be THE centre it once
was,
but HKers are busy ensuring their future and, I think, doing a good job
of that -- pregnant PRC moms notwithstanding."

Do you not think the West will do the same? Why can't it be more
inventive? Are you bowing to theories of IQ here? As for whether HK
will be the center - some power will likely to be transferred to
Shanghai, but HOng Kong with its rule of law and British legacy and
English facility will likely remain an IFC (international finance
center), while Shanghai will only be a NFC for some time to come. Think
New York (HK) vs Chicago (Shanghai) if recall an article saying.



You're right in that feminism bit - in fact as you probably read in
Buchanan's Death of The West he did identify feminism as a factor of
decline of the West - demographic collapse and all the DINKS - but
also the importation of third world invasion and conquest of America,
especially with regards to Hispanics. Hmmmm, as side point, will Hong
Kong, the highest net worth "country" in the world by PPP and 2nd
highest after Japan by US exchange rates, decline as well especially
with the invasion of hordes and hordes of pregnant women from the
mainland who abuse the system face a similar fate,...

You wrote:
"It's simpler than that. Emancipation of women is a natural
development
of democracy, and as is some form of egalitarianism. The one that is
the death knell for a society is the one that halts breeding. And that
isn't egalitarianism. "

So assuming what you said is true, that democracy leads to its eventual
demise (perhaps aggravated by abortion and birth control) vis the
emancipation of women, what do you propose as a solution?

On Jan 23, 1:40 am, "enterprise" wrote:
You took time to travel to Kunming and Li Jiang last year while
condemning that China is so poor and filthy, and you wrote that the
Mainland Chinese are lower than cats and dogs? Who paid for this, since
you yourself wrote that you can't even afford an out-of-state holiday?
Everything you write is a LIE, Paki Whore !

And what about enterprise, are you still dutifully monitoring USENET?
Thought you were 'applying for a transfer' some time ago. How did that
go? Tell us what your job of monitoring USENET entails. What's your
official occupational position? You said you're Jewish - are you hired
by an American or Chinese company to monitor soc.culture.china? You
seem to be hurt when I post articles that reflect the real China - are
you a Chinese spy? Hahahaha!! Still enjoying your job and therefore no
transfer hmmmm?

I suggest that you go to Kunming and Li Jiang (tourist towns by now)
but especially hunt around other less touristy places in China - then
you come back and you'll realize how hyped up some of the posts on
soc.culture.china by a few hardcore posters are....from the point of
view of an *average* mainland Chinese and NOT from a tourist
perspective or from the few multimillionaires.



RichAsianKidwrote:
I was in Kunming and Li Jiang just last year.

Sample pic of Kunming from the web:
http://glasnost.itcarlow.ie/~powerk/...g-downtown.JPG

Great cities, great trip. From the pic, obviously Kunming is *not*
exactly your poor rural China, and yet I swear there are all these
*children* and beggars on the streets just hugging your feet chasing
tourists down in desperate poverty! There are some families who release
them to tourists and they go fetch money for them. Unlike some
countries in SE Asia, these people know no shame and never let go until
you'd paid them. Then that's trouble - another group just swarms you.
They are not allowed near the hotels though, so if you just wander
round the immediate vicinity of your hotels you may not see them. But
walk a few blocks away and you'll run into them invariably. More
children beggars than adult beggars actually. Gotta to learn the trade
early!

A casual search on the web, btw, will show people the real China is in
spite of all the self-congratulatory posts by some:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.image?id=6401

See the other side of China:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/asia-pacific/3906641.stm

Or more beggars!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/153500...2_world300.jpg

Bottom line: if you've been to China, you'll realize that a lot of
posts or reports of Chinese success is really hype. Hype in the sense
that there is a great disparity of wealth and it's simply wrong to
generalize from a few exceptional wealthy nouveau riche cases at the
top to overall levels of wealth in China. People need a reality check
here and not just romantic fantasy. Why? People should know this in the
interest of truth about China in general, as these are primarily a
*.culture newsgroup, and NOT business newsgroups which would have a
better reason of focussing on the very top and exceptional. And when
travelling it is best not just visit the tourist attractions but go and
see how an ordinary citizen lives his/her life, rather than see a
country through the distorted lens of journalists and the commercial
hype of business media.

Obviously China has improved compared to before. Yes, a very small
fraction of the population *did* make millions and even billions. But
again, the relative successes of a very few in Shanghai and Beijing
often do not trickle down to most poor mainland Chinese. First of all,
unemployment rates for university grads may be as high as 39% according
to a China Youth Daily survey as posted before (1), and this is
consistent with why most mainland Chinese students who study in Hong
Kong choose not to return to mainland because there is little
opportunity - they choose to remain in Hong Kong or go to the West
because of the low earning power in China(2).

After graduation, whether one's employed or not, there's the starting
of family. Why there is such a wave of pregnant Mainland Chinese women
flooding to Hong Kong to anchor their jackpot babies? (3) Why are so
many eager to flood this rich former British crown colony and obtain
Hong Kong citizenship? To get the Hong Kong benefits of course - and
HOng Kong is not exactly known as a very generous provider of welfare
or other social services. But Hong Kong does offer the rule of law,
democracy, and is ranked the richest in the world by net worth per
capita PPP adjusted, or 2nd highest in the world after Japan by net
worth per capita by exchange rates. The abrasive fact remains: the
average Hong Kong citizen is worth more than 66 times that of typical
mainland Chinese. Likewise, the average net worth of a mainland Chinese
is an abysmal $2613 US per capita (US exchange rates) while the average
net worth of a Japanese (highest in the world) is $180,837 - the
average Japanese is worth close to 70 times the average mainland
Chinese etc. (4)

Just look at this pic. This was taken NOT in a hospital maternity ward.
It was taken at the "Chinese Travel Agency" where you obtain a
permit/Visa (valid for 10 years) to go to China! Hmmmm. Look at the
red writing on the right hand side of the pic on the wall - it's the
China travel agency!! And look at the third world nature of things -
how ugly people are dressed etc. (Why was RAK forced to be there? Well,
another story, but just enjoy the pic for now.)

http://i18.tinypic.com/2rna134.jpg

And think of it - the quoted stats from other posts are very damning
even if you look at the top. Though growing, only ~ 0.025% of China's
1.3 billion people have $1 million US or more - what a ridiculously
tiny razor-thin microscopic fraction. (5)

Guys, if you don't believe RAK, just visit China - outside the very
core of Shanghai or Beijing (remember that last scene in Mission
Impossible 3? Rural and undeveloped Shanghai in the core of the city
just outside those skyscrapers to give the movie a nice ending, a very
nice contrast, and contrast that was!!) and perhaps Shenzhen and a few
other places the country and you'll immediately see that most of China
is still essentially rotten. (People say how things have improved, wow,
guess China must be real **** in the 1970s and 80s!)

Travel advice: remember: don't stay in your 5-star hotels - the hotels
are not bad actually (but hot water often remains a problem, and there
are some accusations of cheating and overcharging I heard) and I find
them acceptable - and don't just hog those continental breakfest
buffets and think that's the real China - you won't see the real ugly
China, how the average Chinese lives, if you go on a tour group and
just visit tourist attractions. You'll get a very biased and rosy
picture of China and leave with a very wrong impression of how most of
China still lives.

Who would want to live like an average mainland Chinese mired in abject
poverty? Everyone has their own choice. And some Chinese relics and
sites are nice to visit. But so is that exotic forgotten pristine
island in Thailand for, say, spiritual growth, as to disconnect from a
wired world. Yet most of us would not want to abandon the comforts of
materialistic wealth and technological civilization and live
permanently as a primitive native inhabitant over there.

For most in the first world, China is (still) really not liveable. And
many average mainland Chinese have already voted with their feet (if
they have the resources and power to leave, that is) to escape the
country - or at least to seek an escape hatch in case China messes
things up and turn sour - to live less repressed lives and to spread
their previously clipped wings in a world that offers much better
educational and economic opportunities for themselves and for their
families.

* * *
References:

(1)
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchin...ent_664943.htm
"About 51.5 per cent of the respondents said they had learnt nothing
practical in university and 39.2 per cent said they couldn't land a job
with a bachelor's degree, the survey said."

(2)
http://english.people.com.cn/200612/...04_328261.html
"Only 2 percent of Chinese mainland graduates from Hong Kong
universities returned to the mainland to work in 2006, according to a
survey by the University of Hong Kong."

(3)
http://en.ce.cn/National/Local/20061..._9770882.shtml
"Government statistics show that the number of babies born to mainland
parents in Hong Kong had risen from 620 to more than 10,000 in five
years. Also, some mainland women had not settled their hospital bills,
putting more pressure on the SAR's medical system.

The government generally welcomes tourists, Secretary for Security
Ambrose Lee said, but some pregnant mainland women were not coming as
tourists, even though they had valid tourist visas, but to misuse Hong
Kong's public resources. "

(4) Based on UN WIDER 2006 study database:
http://tinyurl.com/yd4hh4

(5)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/stor...945637,00.html
"Yet the Chinese are becoming increasingly well off: according to the
CapGemini Merrill Lynch Asia Pacific wealth report, there are already
320,000 'high net-worth individuals' - those with more than $1m
(£525,000) of net financial assets, excluding their houses - and the
number is growing rapidly. "

In article .com,
says...


On Jan 24, 1:40 am, Vernon North Vernon wrote:
In article .com,
says...


You're forgetting about Chinese Hubris, the Middle Kingdom Mentality.Not at all -- I know it all too well. But trace the trajectory. China
is catching up, and FAST.

Yes, the trajectory. That's big IF.
And you're betting against it, right?

I favor realism - reminder!!! Exactly the title of this thread!! See
for instance this report - China, India Superpower? Not so Fast!
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6407

Likewise I concur with Singapore's Lee Kwan Yew's realism where he said
something like this in the recent past:
"What is gradually happening is the restoration of the world balance to
what it was in the early 19th century or late 18th century when China
and India together were responsible for more than 40 percent of world
GDP. With those two countries becoming part of the globalized trading
world, they are going to go back to approximately the level of world
GDP that they previously occupied. But that doesn't make them the
superpowers of the world."

More navigation by watching the rear-view mirror. You were right when
you said the future is unpredictable. And it's possible that the PRC
has invented a "better" system through which the "collective" may
prosper and even dominate at (what we in the west might call) the
expense of the individual.

It never pays to underestimate threats.

Britain and the US are, for all their
faults, democracies that accept the rule of law. This is not true of
China.

So simplistic I have to laugh. The powers in China accept the rule of
law as much as the powers in our democracies.

Actually it's the average guy who accepts the rule of law perhaps.

Yes, here it certainly is. In China, the "average guy" has the law
stuffed down his throat from time to time, but it appears to be almost
the national sport to ignore the law unless somebody is watching. But
the powerful in most societies find ways to circumvent the law where it
suits them. They are probably more likely to succeed in doing so in
China than North America, but the powerful in NA still get away with a
lot more than the average Joe, who in turn gets away with a lot more
than the average Jamal.

The
powers of China? According to Wikipedia (modified Jan 2007) when you
type in the terms China and rule of law, "In the Anglo-American legal
tradition rule of law has been seen as a guard against despotism and as
enforcing limitations on the power of the government. In the People's
Republic of China the discourse around rule of law centers on the
notion that laws ultimately enhance the power of the state and the
nation, which is why the Chinese government adopts the principle of
rule BY law rather than rule OF law."

Another article from ATimes concludes,

"However, in China, there is a problem when the law meets authority. If
a case arises between two normal people, then the law is somewhat
powerful. But if one person is a company official or from the
government, then **there is no power in the law.** Business people know
that if they have bought political backing, they can get investigations
into their affairs called off and stories in the state media killed (8,
9). (my emphasis)

No doubt about it. Chinese companies employ PR directors with
connections. Their primary functions are navigating through the power
structure and leveraging connections.

I much prefer our system. But I wonder what the average CEO of a US
company thinks about whether they'd prefer a system completely free of
corruption, or one in which it is possible to win a bid through bribery
or to use "palm-oil" to persuade an official to turn a blind eye?

Which system will win out in the long run? An orderly country governed
by the rule of law, or one driven by greed in which anything goes so
long as you bribe the right people? What do you think?

Despite reams of laws written by Beijing over the past two decades, one
prominent foreign lawyer in China believes the rule of law has actually
weakened. By 1997, she says, she encountered Chinese judges who wanted
to build a truly fair legal system. But in 2000, the Communist Party
quietly instructed courts to consider the nation's interests first and
moved independent-minded justices out of power (10).

Worsening the rule of law in China is the fact that many in China see
smuggling, bribes and piracy as victimless crimes, and thus tolerated.
(Bribes and success mean almost the same thing.) The gap in perceptions
highlights the difficulties the Chinese government faces as it tries to
curb corruption. As China is becoming a leading global trading partner,
the lack of law among the government and the citizens is also becoming
an important problem worldwide. This problem must not be ignored. "

You should at least accept that 'gifts' are often necessary to do
business in China? Even you said something similar before, I believe!
No wonder in the perceptions (your fav subject?) of corruption index,
China is ranked so very very low compared to Singapore, Hong Kong,
Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, US etc etc!!
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html

No disagreement on this. I often wonder why US companies continue to do
business in China or with Mainland Chinese partners when it's likely
their intellectual property will be ripped off. But they continue to
pursue the potential. It's almost ironic -- North American business
lured to China by the prospect of a "mountain of gold", there for the
taking! It's like a reversal of the California and Alaskan gold rushes
in the 1800s.



In a world that's increasingly fluid, where the only constant is
change, the past may not always map out the future 1:1.

My point exactly. That's why those who laugh up their sleeves at China
-- always for the past and the present (which becomes the past tomorrow)
-- are indulging in the most dangerous kind of rear-view-mirror-gazing
hubris of underestimating the competition. That's a fool's game.

Again I favor realism - title of this thread, with articles quoted
above. Even you admitted the whole slew of problems in mainland China.
And if reality is so fluid, the past is probably much less predictive
of the future.

Yet you apparently continue to underestimate the threat China poses.

I've quoted before this very readable article by an English/American
writer (with a Chinese wife I believe) for National Review - read it in
full to understand just what many mainland Chinese really think!!

http://www.vdare.com/derbyshire/sino-fascism.htmNoneof this is a surprise to me, but you are ignoring the rate of
progress China is making -- like picking out flaws in a paused frame
instead of watching where the movie is going.

See above - the problem lies with the extrapolation and no one really
knows what it will be.

And one more point about trajectory: Here. It will take a very long
time for China to reach the level of a developed country *EVEN IF* the
trajectory continues - and this is very uncertain and in fact may not
continue ( Hutton above).
It doesn't have to reach the level of a developed country to kick the
props out from under the economies of many developed countries.

From the OP I explicitly said this was more a cultural post - looking
at the average guy in China, reflection of what things are really like,
rather than from an international business perspective. What you said
may be true with all the copying and pirating among other things from
China, of course, but that's due to China's sheer numbers, and not per
capita merit (WRT above discussion obviously most rules can be bent at
the top, not just for China but for other countries as well) - the per
capita point is very shocking: compared to the US, the GDP of China
even in an optimistic projection in 2020 is not yet even the relative
level of Japan compared to the US in 1960!! The per capita part is
important because it addresses how the average mainland Chinese lives.
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/5603/gdpindex4jl.gif

Don't be fooled by the averages. I'd look at the 100 million richest in
China vs. the 100 million richest in the USA. Which of these groups has
more purchasing power? Right now, I'm sure it's the US. But by 2020
I'd guess there will be many more "ten-millionaires" in China than in
the US. I saw plenty of them in China a few weeks ago. There is a LOT
of purchasing power there now, and it's growing very rapidly. And with
it, the ability of the state to finance whatever it wants.


You're right in that feminism bit - in fact as you probably read in
Buchanan's Death of The West he did identify feminism as a factor of
decline of the West - demographic collapse and all the DINKS - but
also the importation of third world invasion and conquest of America,
especially with regards to Hispanics. Hmmmm, as side point, will Hong
Kong, the highest net worth "country" in the world by PPP and 2nd
highest after Japan by US exchange rates, decline as well especially
with the invasion of hordes and hordes of pregnant women from the
mainland who abuse the system face a similar fate, now that it has the
lowest fertility rates in the world and is being invaded by third world
pregnant mainland Chinese moms?
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=hk&v=31

You wrote:
"HK has always found a way to prosper from its position on the edge of
China. HK made a living by dipping its spoon into the river of gold
flowing in and out of China, and it's finding new ways to do that as
the
"river" changes course and content. HK won't be THE centre it once
was,
but HKers are busy ensuring their future and, I think, doing a good job
of that -- pregnant PRC moms notwithstanding."

Do you not think the West will do the same? Why can't it be more
inventive?

For a start, people in the West are accustomed to playing by a different
set of rules - or ANY set or rules for that matter. When they "wise
up" to how business is done in China, they find themselves hampered by
their home country legal systems. To wit:

"MUNICH; Germany — The Siemens black money affair has reached the
company's highest management level: Monday (Dec. 11/06) Former member of
the central management board Thomas Ganswindt has been arrested."

http://www.eetimes.eu/germany/196603689

It's tough to compete when you're in handcuffs.


You're right in that feminism bit - in fact as you probably read in
Buchanan's Death of The West he did identify feminism as a factor of
decline of the West - demographic collapse and all the DINKS - but
also the importation of third world invasion and conquest of America,
especially with regards to Hispanics. Hmmmm, as side point, will Hong
Kong, the highest net worth "country" in the world by PPP and 2nd
highest after Japan by US exchange rates, decline as well especially
with the invasion of hordes and hordes of pregnant women from the
mainland who abuse the system face a similar fate,...

You wrote:
"It's simpler than that. Emancipation of women is a natural
development
of democracy, and as is some form of egalitarianism. The one that is
the death knell for a society is the one that halts breeding. And that
isn't egalitarianism. "

So assuming what you said is true, that democracy leads to its eventual
demise (perhaps aggravated by abortion and birth control) vis the
emancipation of women, what do you propose as a solution?

Chain them to bed and keep them pregnant.

I've got to think about this for a while before I answer. I much prefer
our system, but there's a distinct possibility it's a dinosaur.

Verno

To control chaos in society or groups there was a need to prevent revenge by
individuals and reduce violence to sustain peace. Therefore rules were
created by rulers or leaders. These rules are now known as laws. The
purpose of these laws is to sustain peace and uphold JUSTICE. 'Rule by Law'
or 'Rule of Law' are social creations by humans for the ultimate principle
of Justice and upholding it.

Laws are as imperfect as their creators and do have faults in them. And
therefore had to be implemented together with error correction mechanism.
However the institutions that enforces Laws are too stupid to regulate the
reduction or elimination of these errors and faults. What do we get as a
result? We get : "JUDICIAL VIOLENCE AGAINST JUSTICE"!

Laws were created to protect Humans, but in most cases we humans are
punished to protect the Laws. This flaw in any system if not corrected will
eventually lead to its demise.

Emancipation of women may be an proclaimed act of democracy. Democracy is
rule by people. However children are not allowed to vote in any system. That
means no democracy is a true dmocracy. What happened to emancipation of
children? Are they too weak to protect themselves? Ehat happened to the
protection of the LAW?

There is truely no pure democracy today. America is a imposter that flies
the flag of democracy when needed to justify war and dominance. What these
idiots do not realise is that there is something called evolution and nature
that could end human rein and make irreversible changes. Nature always
finds its ways.


"RichAsianKid" wrote in message
oups.com...


On Jan 24, 1:40 am, Vernon North Vernon wrote:
In article .com,
says...


You're forgetting about Chinese Hubris, the Middle Kingdom
Mentality.Not at all -- I know it all too well. But trace the trajectory.
China
is catching up, and FAST.

Yes, the trajectory. That's big IF.
And you're betting against it, right?

I favor realism - reminder!!! Exactly the title of this thread!! See
for instance this report - China, India Superpower? Not so Fast!
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6407

Likewise I concur with Singapore's Lee Kwan Yew's realism where he said
something like this in the recent past:
"What is gradually happening is the restoration of the world balance to
what it was in the early 19th century or late 18th century when China
and India together were responsible for more than 40 percent of world
GDP. With those two countries becoming part of the globalized trading
world, they are going to go back to approximately the level of world
GDP that they previously occupied. But that doesn't make them the
superpowers of the world."





Britain and the US are, for all their
faults, democracies that accept the rule of law. This is not true of
China.

So simplistic I have to laugh. The powers in China accept the rule of
law as much as the powers in our democracies.

Actually it's the average guy who accepts the rule of law perhaps. The
powers of China? According to Wikipedia (modified Jan 2007) when you
type in the terms China and rule of law, "In the Anglo-American legal
tradition rule of law has been seen as a guard against despotism and as
enforcing limitations on the power of the government. In the People's
Republic of China the discourse around rule of law centers on the
notion that laws ultimately enhance the power of the state and the
nation, which is why the Chinese government adopts the principle of
rule BY law rather than rule OF law."

Another article from ATimes concludes,

"However, in China, there is a problem when the law meets authority. If
a case arises between two normal people, then the law is somewhat
powerful. But if one person is a company official or from the
government, then **there is no power in the law.** Business people know
that if they have bought political backing, they can get investigations
into their affairs called off and stories in the state media killed (8,
9). (my emphasis)

Despite reams of laws written by Beijing over the past two decades, one
prominent foreign lawyer in China believes the rule of law has actually
weakened. By 1997, she says, she encountered Chinese judges who wanted
to build a truly fair legal system. But in 2000, the Communist Party
quietly instructed courts to consider the nation's interests first and
moved independent-minded justices out of power (10).

Worsening the rule of law in China is the fact that many in China see
smuggling, bribes and piracy as victimless crimes, and thus tolerated.
(Bribes and success mean almost the same thing.) The gap in perceptions
highlights the difficulties the Chinese government faces as it tries to
curb corruption. As China is becoming a leading global trading partner,
the lack of law among the government and the citizens is also becoming
an important problem worldwide. This problem must not be ignored. "

You should at least accept that 'gifts' are often necessary to do
business in China? Even you said something similar before, I believe!
No wonder in the perceptions (your fav subject?) of corruption index,
China is ranked so very very low compared to Singapore, Hong Kong,
Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, US etc etc!!
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html



In a world that's increasingly fluid, where the only constant is
change, the past may not always map out the future 1:1.

My point exactly. That's why those who laugh up their sleeves at China
-- always for the past and the present (which becomes the past tomorrow)
-- are indulging in the most dangerous kind of rear-view-mirror-gazing
hubris of underestimating the competition. That's a fool's game.

Again I favor realism - title of this thread, with articles quoted
above. Even you admitted the whole slew of problems in mainland China.
And if reality is so fluid, the past is probably much less predictive
of the future.






I've quoted before this very readable article by an
English/American
writer (with a Chinese wife I believe) for National Review - read
it in
full to understand just what many mainland Chinese really think!!

http://www.vdare.com/derbyshire/sino-fascism.htmNoneof this is a
surprise to me, but you are ignoring the rate of
progress China is making -- like picking out flaws in a paused frame
instead of watching where the movie is going.

See above - the problem lies with the extrapolation and no one really
knows what it will be.

And one more point about trajectory: Here. It will take a very long
time for China to reach the level of a developed country *EVEN IF* the
trajectory continues - and this is very uncertain and in fact may not
continue ( Hutton above).
It doesn't have to reach the level of a developed country to kick the
props out from under the economies of many developed countries.

From the OP I explicitly said this was more a cultural post - looking
at the average guy in China, reflection of what things are really like,
rather than from an international business perspective. What you said
may be true with all the copying and pirating among other things from
China, of course, but that's due to China's sheer numbers, and not per
capita merit (WRT above discussion obviously most rules can be bent at
the top, not just for China but for other countries as well) - the per
capita point is very shocking: compared to the US, the GDP of China
even in an optimistic projection in 2020 is not yet even the relative
level of Japan compared to the US in 1960!! The per capita part is
important because it addresses how the average mainland Chinese lives.
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/5603/gdpindex4jl.gif


You're right in that feminism bit - in fact as you probably read in
Buchanan's Death of The West he did identify feminism as a factor of
decline of the West - demographic collapse and all the DINKS - but
also the importation of third world invasion and conquest of America,
especially with regards to Hispanics. Hmmmm, as side point, will Hong
Kong, the highest net worth "country" in the world by PPP and 2nd
highest after Japan by US exchange rates, decline as well especially
with the invasion of hordes and hordes of pregnant women from the
mainland who abuse the system face a similar fate, now that it has the
lowest fertility rates in the world and is being invaded by third world
pregnant mainland Chinese moms?
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=hk&v=31

You wrote:
"HK has always found a way to prosper from its position on the edge of
China. HK made a living by dipping its spoon into the river of gold
flowing in and out of China, and it's finding new ways to do that as
the
"river" changes course and content. HK won't be THE centre it once
was,
but HKers are busy ensuring their future and, I think, doing a good job
of that -- pregnant PRC moms notwithstanding."

Do you not think the West will do the same? Why can't it be more
inventive? Are you bowing to theories of IQ here? As for whether HK
will be the center - some power will likely to be transferred to
Shanghai, but HOng Kong with its rule of law and British legacy and
English facility will likely remain an IFC (international finance
center), while Shanghai will only be a NFC for some time to come. Think
New York (HK) vs Chicago (Shanghai) if recall an article saying.



You're right in that feminism bit - in fact as you probably read in
Buchanan's Death of The West he did identify feminism as a factor of
decline of the West - demographic collapse and all the DINKS - but
also the importation of third world invasion and conquest of America,
especially with regards to Hispanics. Hmmmm, as side point, will Hong
Kong, the highest net worth "country" in the world by PPP and 2nd
highest after Japan by US exchange rates, decline as well especially
with the invasion of hordes and hordes of pregnant women from the
mainland who abuse the system face a similar fate,...

You wrote:
"It's simpler than that. Emancipation of women is a natural
development
of democracy, and as is some form of egalitarianism. The one that is
the death knell for a society is the one that halts breeding. And that
isn't egalitarianism. "

So assuming what you said is true, that democracy leads to its eventual
demise (perhaps aggravated by abortion and birth control) vis the
emancipation of women, what do you propose as a solution?

On Jan 24, 7:22 pm, Vernon North Vernon wrote:
In article .com,
says...





On Jan 24, 1:40 am, Vernon North Vernon wrote:
In article .com,
says...

You're forgetting about Chinese Hubris, the Middle Kingdom Mentality.Not at all -- I know it all too well. But trace the trajectory. China
is catching up, and FAST.

Yes, the trajectory. That's big IF.
And you're betting against it, right?

I favor realism - reminder!!! Exactly the title of this thread!! See
for instance this report - China, India Superpower? Not so Fast!
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6407

Likewise I concur with Singapore's Lee Kwan Yew's realism where he said
something like this in the recent past:
"What is gradually happening is the restoration of the world balance to
what it was in the early 19th century or late 18th century when China
and India together were responsible for more than 40 percent of world
GDP. With those two countries becoming part of the globalized trading
world, they are going to go back to approximately the level of world
GDP that they previously occupied. But that doesn't make them the
superpowers of the world."More navigation by watching the rear-view mirror. You were right when
you said the future is unpredictable. And it's possible that the PRC
has invented a "better" system through which the "collective" may
prosper and even dominate at (what we in the west might call) the
expense of the individual.


How did China "invent" a better system? Certainly the system as
practised right now is not "invented" by Chinese - they're Western
ideas - whether it's communism (from Marx) till the late 20th century
for China or the now more liberalized "free-trade zones"/ideas of
capitalism whatever it's called (politico-philosophical ideas from
Locke-Smith) - from a Western heritage. It's true that China might have
trimmed Western ideas down to Chinese characteristics, a system that
might provide a better fit for its own people, but to pretend that
China somehow found this magic bullet and "invented" a system de novo
ex nihilo-- thus perhaps implying originality -- is just ludicrous. Not
saying that you meant it that way, but that was my first impression
when I read what you wrote. This may sound like semantics, but it's
actually an important point for some I suspect - Chinese sentiment is
such that it's like a scorned women - never underestimate the fury! The
19th and 20th century witness a decline of power of China, the sick man
of Asia etc, will civil war, defeats by foreign western/japanese power
etc, that now with a surge in perceived economic (and military) might
it is really hellbent on asserting a rightful place in the world -
hence its atavistic anti-West (and anti-Japanese) sentiment. Thus if
you can invent a system and succeed at it, then that would be
intellectual (perhaps spiritual) vindication. BUT....if the ideas are
based on the West anyway (Marx, Locke-Smith, ancient Greeks) that would
be a HUGE concession - the West found it first. Anyway that's my take
on it, feel free to disagree. (BTW Singapore's prime minister also
said something similar: China is living on the West's intellectual
capital or something similar a while back if I recall correctly)


It never pays to underestimate threats.

Threats? Come on, there are only opportunities in business!? (only real
threat would be for blue collar Americans who lose their jobs, now
*that's* a real personal threat)

Yet I don't believe in hype either. Bottom line - no one knows the
future (by 1980s projection Japan would have overtaken America?) and an
unexpected financial crisis or burst of the bubble or social unrest etc
may well derail the jugglenaut. It's a possibility. How likely is it no
one knows. All a matter of debate, see, for example, another essay from
the Stanford Journal of East Asian Studies concludes the following
which I know you'll disagree but it goes as such. I'll spare you the
links.

"By all these measures, China is not now a superpower, nor is it likely
to emerge as one soon. It is establishing itself as a great power, on a
par with Great Britain, Russia, Japan, and, perhaps, India. China is
today a serious player in the regional politics of Asia but just one of
several. In global affairs, its stature and power are growing, but in
most respects it remains a regional power, complementing the cast of
other great powers under the overarching dominance, however momentary,
of the United States. China's rise over the past two decades has been
spectacular from any perspective and deserves attention and respect,
especially in view of the difficult course of China's attempt to
adapt to the modern world since the nineteenth century. From the
perspective of realist geopolitics, however, it does not merit the
alarm and trepidation that the announcement of a rival superpower might
conjure. Napoleon, in that regard, may be right, but not yet and not
soon. "





The
powers of China? According to Wikipedia (modified Jan 2007) when you
type in the terms China and rule of law, "In the Anglo-American legal
tradition rule of law has been seen as a guard against despotism and as
enforcing limitations on the power of the government. In the People's
Republic of China the discourse around rule of law centers on the
notion that laws ultimately enhance the power of the state and the
nation, which is why the Chinese government adopts the principle of
rule BY law rather than rule OF law."

Another article from ATimes concludes,

"However, in China, there is a problem when the law meets authority. If
a case arises between two normal people, then the law is somewhat
powerful. But if one person is a company official or from the
government, then **there is no power in the law.** Business people know
that if they have bought political backing, they can get investigations
into their affairs called off and stories in the state media killed (8,
9). (my emphasis)No doubt about it. Chinese companies employ PR directors with
connections. Their primary functions are navigating through the power
structure and leveraging connections.

I much prefer our system. But I wonder what the average CEO of a US
company thinks about whether they'd prefer a system completely free of
corruption, or one in which it is possible to win a bid through bribery
or to use "palm-oil" to persuade an official to turn a blind eye?

Which system will win out in the long run? An orderly country governed
by the rule of law, or one driven by greed in which anything goes so
long as you bribe the right people? What do you think?



Networking is very important. As to your second part, it's difficult to
know. One can easily cite The End of History and the Last Man by
Japanese-American Francis Fukuyama? "What we may be witnessing is not
just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of
post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end
point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of
Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government."
(quoted from "The End of History?", 1989)" But I'll not do that - as
freedom and democracy really had a very little lifespan and elsewhere
I've read stuff of how hierarchy, authoritarian systems may be the
default MO of the human condition. As to the actual questions, what's
'winning'? More productive economically? Theoretically the rule of law
in an orderly country would win out because it's more conducive towards
meritocracy, and it is very possible that you'll form extended
dynasties and blocs which are highly inefficient and everyone loses
with a corrupt system, even if it's driven by greed. But that's in
theory. Of course the easy way out is 'time will tell', as everything
is ultimately Darwinian why not wait and see.




Despite reams of laws written by Beijing over the past two decades, one
prominent foreign lawyer in China believes the rule of law has actually
weakened. By 1997, she says, she encountered Chinese judges who wanted
to build a truly fair legal system. But in 2000, the Communist Party
quietly instructed courts to consider the nation's interests first and
moved independent-minded justices out of power (10).

Worsening the rule of law in China is the fact that many in China see
smuggling, bribes and piracy as victimless crimes, and thus tolerated.
(Bribes and success mean almost the same thing.) The gap in perceptions
highlights the difficulties the Chinese government faces as it tries to
curb corruption. As China is becoming a leading global trading partner,
the lack of law among the government and the citizens is also becoming
an important problem worldwide. This problem must not be ignored. "

You should at least accept that 'gifts' are often necessary to do
business in China? Even you said something similar before, I believe!
No wonder in the perceptions (your fav subject?) of corruption index,
China is ranked so very very low compared to Singapore, Hong Kong,
Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, US etc etc!!
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.htmlNo disagreement on this. I often wonder why US companies continue to do
business in China or with Mainland Chinese partners when it's likely
their intellectual property will be ripped off. But they continue to
pursue the potential. It's almost ironic -- North American business
lured to China by the prospect of a "mountain of gold", there for the
taking! It's like a reversal of the California and Alaskan gold rushes
in the 1800s.


Ah but I already wrote above: threats? Come on there are only
opportunities in business! Speculation: short term gains probably
outweigh long term calculations, or at leasts costs would be shouldered
by other companies.

(I'd point out once again though how the topic keeps slipping away,
that the top business world wrt China in trade, $ making etc is very
very different from how the average mainland CHinese live. Though lives
probably have improved for the 400 million or so, the rest languish in
abject poverty. Which is why I wrote in the original thread:

"Bottom line: if you've been to China, you'll realize that a lot of
posts or reports of Chinese success is really hype. Hype in the sense
that there is a great disparity of wealth and it's simply wrong to
generalize from a few exceptional wealthy nouveau riche cases at the
top to overall levels of wealth in China. People need a reality check
here and not just romantic fantasy. Why? People should know this in the
interest of truth about China in general, as these are primarily a
*.culture newsgroup, and NOT business newsgroups which would have a
better reason of focussing on the very top and exceptional. And when
travelling it is best not just visit the tourist attractions but go and
see how an ordinary citizen lives his/her life, rather than see a
country through the distorted lens of journalists and the commercial
hype of business media. ")




I've quoted before this very readable article by an English/American
writer (with a Chinese wife I believe) for National Review - read it in
full to understand just what many mainland Chinese really think!!

http://www.vdare.com/derbyshire/sino....htmNoneofthis is a surprise to me, but you are ignoring the rate of
progress China is making -- like picking out flaws in a paused frame
instead of watching where the movie is going.

See above - the problem lies with the extrapolation and no one really
knows what it will be.

And one more point about trajectory: Here. It will take a very long
time for China to reach the level of a developed country *EVEN IF* the
trajectory continues - and this is very uncertain and in fact may not
continue ( Hutton above).
It doesn't have to reach the level of a developed country to kick the
props out from under the economies of many developed countries.

From the OP I explicitly said this was more a cultural post - looking
at the average guy in China, reflection of what things are really like,
rather than from an international business perspective. What you said
may be true with all the copying and pirating among other things from
China, of course, but that's due to China's sheer numbers, and not per
capita merit (WRT above discussion obviously most rules can be bent at
the top, not just for China but for other countries as well) - the per
capita point is very shocking: compared to the US, the GDP of China
even in an optimistic projection in 2020 is not yet even the relative
level of Japan compared to the US in 1960!! The per capita part is
important because it addresses how the average mainland Chinese lives.
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/5603/gdpindex4jl.gifDon't be fooled by the averages. I'd look at the 100 million richest in
China vs. the 100 million richest in the USA. Which of these groups has
more purchasing power? Right now, I'm sure it's the US. But by 2020
I'd guess there will be many more "ten-millionaires" in China than in
the US. I saw plenty of them in China a few weeks ago. There is a LOT
of purchasing power there now, and it's growing very rapidly. And with
it, the ability of the state to finance whatever it wants.


Again with reference to my reply above, first off the top can be/is
very different from the average, which is the focus of the thread.
Second, even India has more billionaires than China, and collectively
they have greater assets.

Speaking of India, what do you think of the prospects of India vs
China?



You're right in that feminism bit - in fact as you probably read in
Buchanan's Death of The West he did identify feminism as a factor of
decline of the West - demographic collapse and all the DINKS - but
also the importation of third world invasion and conquest of America,
especially with regards to Hispanics. Hmmmm, as side point, will Hong
Kong, the highest net worth "country" in the world by PPP and 2nd
highest after Japan by US exchange rates, decline as well especially
with the invasion of hordes and hordes of pregnant women from the
mainland who abuse the system face a similar fate, now that it has the
lowest fertility rates in the world and is being invaded by third world
pregnant mainland Chinese moms?
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=hk&v=31

Google cuts off at this point so here's my reply:

You wrote:
"For a start, people in the West are accustomed to playing by a
different
set of rules - or ANY set or rules for that matter. When they "wise
up" to how business is done in China, they find themselves hampered by
their home country legal systems. To wit:

"MUNICH; Germany - The Siemens black money affair has reached the
company's highest management level: Monday (Dec. 11/06) Former member
of
the central management board Thomas Ganswindt has been arrested."

http://www.eetimes.eu/germany/196603689

It's tough to compete when you're in handcuffs."

Reply:
I've heard of stories that there have been cases where doctors perform
multiple unnecessary procedures in China and even in Hong Kong and yet
patients still follow orders obediently (found out when something goes
wrong and the case is reviewed in court) because they're uneducated and
there is a huge educational differential between those in charge and
those who are not - probably same in law and business, thus they can
get away way more easily compared to the West. And the line between a
stock tip and insider trading there is very very blurry.


"It's simpler than that. Emancipation of women is a natural
development
of democracy, and as is some form of egalitarianism. The one that is
the death knell for a society is the one that halts breeding. And that
isn't egalitarianism. "

So assuming what you said is true, that democracy leads to its eventual
demise (perhaps aggravated by abortion and birth control) vis the
emancipation of women, what do you propose as a solution?

You wrote: Chain them to bed and keep them pregnant.

Reply: did you read my thread on Another Reason to Love the Far
East...True Story? Did you try out something similar in China?