Chinese Economics Thread

[2handedswordsman]

All I'm saying is that China's system works and traditional socialism does not. Whatever has to be done to make it work for China, China has done it and it clearly did not result in a system that pays everyone equally regardless of qualifications and contributions as Kaeshmiri suggests. I have no philosophical attachments except that China needs to do whatever it can to be the strongest nation.

The economic growth during Mao's rule was highly unstable, sometimes growing by 20% and sometimes dropping by 16%. It is not healthy growth with strong momentum. Most of his economic policies, especially calling for the melting of existing items to make iron, did not make sense. He was known to be an excellent general but a poor economist.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Once again, the Soviet tactic did not work while the Chinese one did in the long run. The result is clear and results always trump ideology.

I don't care about Marx; he might have meant well but his ideology doesn't work anywhere in the world. China borrowed some things from him but China did not actually follow him or the country would be ruined like every other one that did. China created its own system; it was not meant to spread philosophy or honor any man's ideals. China's system was designed to make China succeed and succeed it did.

I wish for the CCP to use any way it can to bring China to the top of the world. To me, the main difference between the KMT and CCP is that the KMT were spineless and wanted to bow to the West and subject China to a future like that of Japan's for momentary comfort while the CCP dared to dream that China can rise on its own power and stand to eclipse all else. The CCP realized that this dream is possible and worth suffering for. That's my admiration for them as well as their flexibility in policy to create their own system rather than pick amongst the options presented to them. At the core, Chinese strength is all that matters; the economical politics used to achieve it are secondary/tertiary details compared to the core. Black cat or white cat, if it catches the mouse, it's a good cat.

In the end, your post doesn't address the points I raised, which describe why it doesn't work to strip wealth from corporation owners to give overwhelmingly high pay to those who perform menial tasks. Never sacrifice success for loyalty to ideology; this rigidity is a mistake made by defeated civilizations.

I think that my post is directly adresses the points you raised but you have to be open minded to else's talk. I don't want to get into long debates because my english are not strong and will take time and space. PS. Soviet tactic did work during Stalin's era, USSR became nuclear global super power in 30 years. Managed to master technologies that PRC is struggling even nowdays to master. Managed to be the counterweight of Western Imperialism for decades, managed to inspire the Chinese people to seek their own dignity and prosperity.

*did you know about Chinese Soviet Republic?

 

[manqiangrexue]

I think that my post is directly adresses the points you raised but you have to be open minded to else's talk.

Your post does not address how to stop the gravitation of your entire society towards low effort meniality if you reward those workers the same as you do innovators and highly skilled/educated contributors. Telling me to read everything Marx wrote does not qualify as a response. If you think he has fairly addressed my concern, you can quote him because it is your argument now. If you want to address my points, you can write a point-to-point rebuttal to this post:

Chinese Economics Thread

Getting to $30 Trillion: China Aims for Largest Economy by 2035 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Much of the focus at this year’s upcoming National People’s Congress (NPC) will...

www.sinodefenceforum.com

I don't want to get into long debates because my english are not strong and will take time and space. PS. Soviet tactic did work during Stalin's era, USSR became nuclear global super power in 30 years. Managed to master technologies that PRC is struggling even nowdays to master. Managed to be the counterweight of Western Imperialism for decades, managed to inspire the Chinese people to seek their own dignity and prosperity.

The Soviet Union never built an economy more than a midget compared to America's and because this base was poor, it never progressed to being the all-around challenger that China is today. The Soviets got a very good head start with German technology as a base and thus became a military superpower only. They could not build a good economy to support it or they would not have lost the Cold War. Soviet technology started high but could not outpace America whereas Chinese technology started low and is outpacing everyone. Although what they did was inspirational to China, China would not follow the USSR just like it would not follow the USA. China answers to no liege and strives to become a lord in itself and China has done and will do much more than the USSR because it is more adaptable to need/environment rather than loyal to philosophy.

 

[2handedswordsman]

Your post does not address how to stop the gravitation of your entire society towards low effort meniality if you reward those workers the same as you do innovators and highly skilled/educated contributors. Telling me to read everything Marx wrote does not qualify as a response. If you think he has fairly addressed my concern, you can quote him because it is your argument now. If you want to address my points, you can write a point-to-point rebuttal to this post:

Chinese Economics Thread

Getting to $30 Trillion: China Aims for Largest Economy by 2035 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Much of the focus at this year’s upcoming National People’s Congress (NPC) will...

www.sinodefenceforum.com

The Soviet Union never built an economy more than a midget compared to America's and because this base was poor, it never progressed to being the all-around challenger that China is today. The Soviets got a very good head start with German technology as a base and thus became a military superpower only. They could not build a good economy to support it or they would not have lost the Cold War. Soviet technology started high but could not outpace America whereas Chinese technology started low and is outpacing everyone. Although what they did was inspirational to China, China would not follow the USSR just like it would not follow the USA. China answers to no liege and strives to become a lord in itself and China has done and will do much more than the USSR because it is more adaptable to need/environment rather than loyal to philosophy.

Mate what are you talking about? What you mean "my society"? Open your eyes, can't you see that the children of people who recently got out of poverty lag behind at opportunities and back-ups to Jack Ma's children for example? Do you mean Tesla, Einstein, David Bohm, or to get more to the point, Igor Kurchatov, Quian Xuesen and countless socialist scientists needed material rewards to get innovative? Did you know that in the 80's the number of women engineer graduates in USSR exceeded the number of US both genres? From your argumentations, seems not. Human to thrive needs just the proper material conditions. Not the hunt of profit. The profit driven society you dream, the pure greed, led the human civilisation to rot. And you dare to bring it as an argument? "You see Westerners? Lets be Like them" You want China to be the next global interventionist supremascist? Sorry but i tend to recall calling you progressive.
Please don't drop the level of conversation on quoting phrases. If you want to understand your country's politics and economics , this is your duty. You should study to what CPC says and doing, and not trying to reflect it through the mirrors of the economist and bloomberg. As you can see I'm just a poor Greek observer not a Chinese nationalist
Soviets managed to set up and prepare the mechanism to beat the Nazis before taking booty any German technology, technology which also stolen by US btw. Werner von Braun took Americans to space. Soviets by Korolev. You see the qualitative difference or I'm talking to a wall? US never suffered a WW in its territories, they managed to capitalise the destruction. On the other hand the midgets you say, rebuild themselves rapidly and also sent knowledge money and engineers to PRC to realise the the first 5 year plan, with over 700 heavy industries being built in 5 years. Even the miraculus double decker Yangtze bridge built those time with soviet help. Soviets never looted the whole world to build up their economy, they worked their asses up to achive anything achieved.

Yes i know. First satellite soviet, first man in space soviet, first moon landing soviet, first mars landing soviet, first spacewalk soviet, first space station soviet, first man at the moon US. US won. LOL Where you've raised at, please remind me?

​

 

[HybridHypothesis]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[manqiangrexue]

Mate what are you talking about? What you mean "my society"?

The society you envision.

Open your eyes, can't you see that the children of people who recently got out of poverty lag behind at opportunities and back-ups to Jack Ma's children for example?

In every society, the children of the wealthy have more opportunities than the children of the poor. A society aims to reduce the gap in order to draw from all of its genetic talents but it can never be eliminated unless you eliminate parenting. This is not the point of the discussion.

Do you mean Tesla, Einstein, David Bohm, or to get more to the point, Igor Kurchatov, Quian Xuesen and countless socialist scientists needed material rewards to get innovative?

And how many more scientists did need rewards to get innovative? So many more, you cannot name them. Even great scientists willing to be heroes and work for nothing need legions of scientists underneath them to carry out their orders and experiments. If you lack the material rewards, you will fail to recruit these scientists. A country cannot rely on heroes alone; the population must rise up together and for most people, proper reward is needed.

Did you know that in the 80's the number of women engineer graduates in USSR exceeded the number of US both genres? From your argumentations, seems not.

I didn't know that and I don't see the point. The Soviet Union may graduate them, but did they stay in the Soviet Union or did they go elsewhere when offered better pay? For the great number of engineers that you tout, Soviet technology certainly did not outpace American technology.

Human to thrive needs just the proper material conditions. Not the hunt of profit. The profit driven society you dream, the pure greed, led the human civilisation to rot.

They need both. History shows again and again that if you do not reward excellence, your society drifts towards meniality.

And you dare to bring it as an argument? "You see Westerners? Lets be Like them" You want China to be the next global interventionist supremascist?

I never said that China should be more like the West. I said that China's current unique system works and that a system that disrupts that system stripping the wealth of billionaires to lavish pay onto menial laborers will fail. I don't think you read or understand my argument at all, especially when you start talking about "global interventionalist supremacist".

Sorry but i tend to recall calling you progressive.

No, I am a realist. I look at results; I don't fantasize about utopias against human nature.

Please don't drop the level of conversation on quoting phrases.

You cannot address my actual points and just tell me to read all of Marx's writings. This is failing to defend your point and dropping the level of conversation.

If you want to understand your country's politics and economics , this is your duty. You should study to what CPC says and doing, and not trying to reflect it through the mirrors of the economist and bloomberg. As you can see I'm just a poor Greek observer not a Chinese nationalist

I'm looking at what they are doing and it's working and others are talking about changing it to a ridiculous version that works nowhere. I hear the CCP talk about sticking to Marxism, but I don't see them doing it. Sometimes, I wonder if they said that to throw off hostile nations and alleviating their fears of dealing with China's true system to instill in them false confidence that China will fail like all other true socialist/Marxist economies.

Soviets managed to set up and prepare the mechanism to beat the Nazis before taking booty any German technology, technology which also stolen by US btw. Werner von Braun took Americans to space. Soviets by Korolev. You see the qualitative difference or I'm talking to a wall? US never suffered a WW in its territories, they managed to capitalise the destruction. On the other hand the midgets you say, rebuild themselves rapidly and also sent knowledge money and engineers to PRC to realise the the first 5 year plan, with over 700 heavy industries being built in 5 years. Even the miraculus double decker Yangtze bridge built those time with soviet help. Soviets never looted the whole world to build up their economy, they worked their asses up to achive anything achieved.

Yes i know. First satellite soviet, first man in space soviet, first moon landing soviet, first mars landing soviet, first spacewalk soviet, first space station soviet, first man at the moon US. US won. LOL Where you've raised at, please remind me?

But they failed to challenge the US and fell apart. This negates all of your praise and China must do things differently to avoid the same fate.

Once again, I'm talking in the realms of realism. A company cannot divide its assets lavishly onto its menial workers stripping its owner of his wealth. Such a company will fail. That's all that I said and you have always failed to rebut this and instead tried to lead me onto some ideological journey where you set up a straw man imagining that I said that China should become more like the West. I said no such thing. I said that China should continue its course as it always has; it should not follow the West just like it always refused to do but it should definitely not fall back to pure socialism/Marxism. Its system is working perfectly and it needs to keep the status quo; improvements should be in small refinements when made. You don't even know what my argument was much less address it.

 

[localizer]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The success of which all depends on US debt/dollar. Funny thing is they can't count.

 

[horse]

The success of which all depends on US debt/dollar. Funny thing is they can't count.

Agree. Their plans cannot be taken seriously.

All someone like Cotton wants is for everyone to volunteer to be the next Australia and Canada.

Uncle Sam really wants its friends and allies to repeat the Great Depression with unending trade wars. That is one of the biggest problems of Americans. No sense or knowledge of history.

That guy Cotton never heard of the European arms embargo, after the 6.4 incident! They can collectively do that again, this time in other industries. Self-defeating and ineffective, unless they want to improve their chances of another Great Depression in the west. China grew last year, it will drag ASEAN along.

The Americans still do not have a plan. Not a real plan.

 

[gelgoog]

The Soviet Union collapsed because their political elites wanted more wealth and power for themselves. The people didn't want the collapse. Just before the SU broke up there was a referendum in 1991 and the majority of citizens voted in favor of retaining the Union (77.85%). Not that it mattered since politicians like Yeltsin threw down the government with a coup.

With regards to technology and the advantage of the US vs the Soviets it depended on the sector in question. While the Soviet Union was behind in microelectronics for example they had the advantage in other sectors like materials science. They had much better metallurgy.

 

[localizer]

Agree. Their plans cannot be taken seriously.

All someone like Cotton wants is for everyone to volunteer to be the next Australia and Canada.

Uncle Sam really wants its friends and allies to repeat the Great Depression with unending trade wars. That is one of the biggest problems of Americans. No sense or knowledge of history.

That guy Cotton never heard of the European arms embargo, after the 6.4 incident! They can collectively do that again, this time in other industries. Self-defeating and ineffective, unless they want to improve their chances of another Great Depression in the west. China grew last year, it will drag ASEAN along.

The Americans still do not have a plan. Not a real plan.

The Soviet Union collapsed because their political elites wanted more wealth and power for themselves. The people didn't want the collapse. Just before the SU broke up there was a referendum in 1991 and the majority of citizens voted in favor of retaining the Union (77.85%). Not that it mattered since people like Yeltsin threw down the government with a coup.

If anything it's the US empire that will collapse like the USSR. Taking down China doesn't mean their empire continues either.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I'm pretty sure US will reach 200% debt to GDP in 10 years.

Chinese civilization and language have lasted 5000 years. China doesn't like wars and empires.

 

[2handedswordsman]

I will answer only to two points and i will leave it here. Our conversation got off topic.

I don't fantasize about utopias against human nature

And who decided which human nature is? The Neoliberals? So there's no evolution, and no evolution of conscioussness? These people who theoriticise their greed and immorallity of people exploiting other people? Come on...

I hear the CCP talk about sticking to Marxism, but I don't see them doing it

Since you have not any idea of what Marxism is, how you reached to that conclusion? I repeat, Das Kapital, or The Capital in English, which happens to be a UN cultural heritage, as is headline says, is a deep critic and analysis of capitalism. Both economic and philosophical. The are is not a certain way which one uses this tool. OK? Capitalism made it first historical appearence at the end of medieval ages, about 1500 in Venice. It came through backs and forths before being globally enforced during which times? Yes you got it, colonialism. The first stock market about 1611 in Netherlands and generally reached maturity during 19th century after the industrial revolution. Reached it's final stage, Imperialism, during 20th century. It took 500 years to reach it's historical and logical limits. How can you judge and dispose the socialism hypothesis from it's first blindfolded steps?

Do you want to tell you about Imperialism as the final form of Capitalism in simple words ? Ok let me tell you. No need of guns and colonialism. Just "legal" tools like FDI's, IMF and World bank loans( in change you give them your f...ing sovereignity ) , imposing Dollar as global currency (or EURO, here in Europe, which is the nickname of the Deutcshe Mark ) backed by the presses printing money out of thin air creating debt which is never meant to be repaid. This is the "legally" backed robbery by the 1%. This is the human nature you up to? No i believe it's not. Think about it