Posted on 01/23/2011 8:51:38 AM PST by SeekAndFind
One of the great ironies revealed by the global recession that began in 2008 is that Communist Party–ruled China may be doing a better job managing capitalism's crisis than the democratically elected U.S. government. Beijing's stimulus spending was larger, infinitely more effective at overcoming the slowdown and directed at laying the infrastructural tracks for further economic expansion.
As Western democracies shuffle wheezily forward, China's economy roars along at a steady clip, having lifted some half a billion people out of poverty over the past three decades and rapidly created the world's largest middle class to provide an engine for long-term domestic consumer demand. Sure, there's massive social inequality, but there always is in a capitalist system. (Income inequality rates in the U.S. are some of the worst in the industrialized world, and more Americans are falling into poverty than are being raised out of it. The number of Americans officially designated as living in poverty in 2009 — 43 million — was the highest in the 51 years that records have been kept.)
Beijing is also doing a far more effective job than Washington of tooling its economy to meet future challenges — at least according to historian Francis Fukuyama, erstwhile neoconservative intellectual heavyweight. "President Hu Jintao's rare state visit to Washington this week comes at a time when many Chinese see their weathering of the financial crisis as a vindication of their own system, and the beginning of an era in which U.S.-style liberal ideas will no longer be dominant," wrote Fukuyama in Monday's Financial Times under a headline stating that the U.S. had little to teach China. "State-owned enterprises are back in vogue, and were the chosen mechanism through which Beijing administered its massive stimulus."
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
Everyone forgets that the USSR and Eastern Europe collapsed because of central planning. The same will happen to China.
Gosh, where have we heard that before?
Yeah, Red China does capitalism so well that almost 15% of their people benefit from it.
A more accurate assessment would be "Why China does House of Cards better than the US."
"Stimulus" propped up economies cannot last.
China’s recovery had nothing to do with stimulus. It was simply a matter of greater momentum going into the recession. When you’re growing at better than 10%, and the rest of the world hits a recession, you slow down to 5 or 6%, but that’s still not a recession.
Well said.
China’s in deep trouble, and the problem with spending on state-run industries, is that you can’t dispose of malinvestment.
That’s the purpose of recessions to destroy bad investments. China’s pumping them up with money which will hurt them in the long run.
“Why China Does Capitalism Better than the U.S.”
EASY - their leaders don’t HATE their country. Same with Russia.
Succinct and to the point. People on here scream that the Chinese and Russian governments are fascist and control everything, but the Chinese are also innovating and learning that Communsim doesn’t work. China has thousands of privately owned businesses that the govnerment isn’t trying to destroy and I don’t think the government will care unless the owner is breaking hte law.
I heard that a lot of the American flags we wave are made in China.
The core of the Chinese economy is run by the PLA. The Party leadership bows to the Army.
Smart move of the government. So DIFFERENT from our government, whihc spits on the military.
China has problems, way too many government employees (all entities that receive a government check are non producers), and the tendency for government employees to become tribute parasites.
The Chinese Communists have been smart enough to drop enforcement of purist economic communism to pull off this growth, but it won't sustain in the long run, unless they throw EVERY communist principle and policy in the trash, along with nearly all the non producers.
Not likely a Marxist will give up power, our own DemoRats prove that everyday.
And beneath the surface of all the debates about free trade and globalism is the question of whether the US should remain a mostly independent nation. Many don’t think we should, and they actually believe nations should be ‘interdependent’ rather than independent.
Interdependence is another one of the crackpot ideas that gained currency after WWII as a way to prevent future wars, when in reality nuclear weapons pretty well ensured that the industrial nations of that era would never go to war with each other again.
Every nation should retain a great degree of independence, and trade in situations where other nations have natural resources or goods and services of a unique nature, and not all this jobs and technology for cheap labor and lax regulation that is all most US trade with developing nations amounts to now.
Doesn’t anybody find it disturbing that the liberal media is now trumpeting the virtues of Chinese state capitalism as the answer to all our woes?
The liberals say:
Hey, why shouldn’t the United States adopt the Chinese model, where your have Democratic Party apparatchiks make all the decisions from Washington, just like the Communist Party apparatchiks makes all the decisions from Beijing?
You can always take Chicom economic statistics to the bank. /s
Interdependence isn’t a bad thing. The alternative is autarky, and that’s Mussolini’s economic argument. As about everything he did, if it’s got Mussolini, you know it looks good on the outside...
All nations are in some way interdependent with one another.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.