Chinese Economics Thread

[BrightFuture]

Because then you would have many many people wanting to be janitors since it pays almost equal to chief engineer. Who wants to do college then PhD, when you get paid the same as a floor sweeper out of elementary school? Who would take all the financial risk of developing his idea and forging a company around it if the reward is that he gets paid a sliver more than what he'd earn flipping burgers for someone else without a worry in the world? Another thing, if the company owner divides up all his wealth, what happens when the company hits a rough patch and has to operate at a loss? Are all the employees expected to spit the cash back up and work for free? What happens when the company needs to undertake expensive risky research? Are all the employees expected to put their cash together and shoulder the bill? Your society will have a fatal lacking of intellectual resources and developmental drive.

You clearly don't know anything about Socialism if you think it means everyone will earn the same.

China doesn't follow this principle; China is socialist in name only, and that is why it is thriving. If it follows these socialist and Marxist principles to the tee, China would fade like the Soviet Union.

Entire generations of Chinese communists would be turning in their graves if the read what you just wrote. It's a shame to see that a lot of Chinese patriots in this forum are still neoliberals despite loving and allegedly knowing about China

That's not happening. Your definition of socialism doesn't work anywhere and China's success and divergence from the Soviet Union's failure was built on China understanding this.

China can call itself anything it wants; I wouldn't waste time arguing over words. China's brand of unique capitalism/"socialism" is what brings it success.

I don't know if you can read Chinese, if you can, read this:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I don't think the words of 习近平 is something to take as a bluff. The same with the words of many CPC members who have written Marxist analysis about China and its future.

I would write more, but I really have no time.

 

[manqiangrexue]

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

You skipped my actual argument which was even bolded for you. What you say is completely pointless. What do you want from China? To change towards this way, that way, or to continue as it is? You are rambling without a point now in the philosophical realm whereas I am only interested in the pertinent realism.

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...

Human nature is to want things. In a population of people, very few will want to altruistically fight for a cause while most want a comfortable lifestyle and wealth. There is no example that counters this in any successful or powerful nation. Perhaps you can argue it is opposite in North Korea but even that is far from certain.

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

I don't care about pure, true Marxism. I know that China's system does not significantly diverge from that of successful economies in respect to the structure of reward and compensation as a dependent on skill and education. If anything, Chinese unskilled laborers are paid even less as a fraction of what is paid to the educated elites of the organization as compared to the West. This seems less Marxist to me and is producing superior economic growth results. In other areas, China will differ from the West again, perhaps in some areas being more Marxist, but really, it's just more Chinese. China's own unique system that no hostile nation has figured out a counter play against. This is real and working; I don't care about what is written on books written by Marx or whomever, that only creates failure in those who try to emulate without heavy personalized modification and hybridization.

 

[Gatekeeper]

Guys. Please cease this now. It's pointless.

 

[manqiangrexue]

You clearly don't know anything about Socialism if you think it means everyone will earn the same.

This stems from the argument with Kaeshmiri suggesting that there should be no billionaires and the wealth of every company should be split down all the way until the janitors drive luxury cars. This is what the argument is about, and nobody addresses this. Nobody, including yourself, answers my questions which you just quoted. Instead they brush those aside and try to take me on philosophical journeys.

Entire generations of Chinese communists would be turning in their graves if the read what you just wrote. It's a shame to see that a lot of Chinese patriots in this forum are still neoliberals despite loving and allegedly knowing about China

If they died fighting for communism, then they died wrong. If they died fighting for China, then they should be moved by China's success regardless. I love China and I want China to succeed. I don't care about specific ideologies or loyalty to them. China should actively adapt its ideology to every different circumstance in every different area. Be tied down by nothing, and economically, seeing China's successful model, that's what they're doing.

I don't know if you can read Chinese, if you can, read this:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I don't think the words of 习近平 is something to take as a bluff. The same with the words of many CPC members who have written Marxist analysis about China and its future.

I would write more, but I really have no time.

As I said, I don't see a transition to what Kaeshmiri said, which is stripping wealth from the rich to lavish onto the poor. What ever else they or Xi said, it can be modified as needed, designed to throw off hostile nations attempting to counter China, or they could incorporate other characteristics of Marxism or whatever as an evolution to the Chinese model. But China is NOT headed in a major overhaul direction where there are no billionaires and floor sweepers of successful companies rake in high income salaries.

 

[KYli]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Petrolicious88]

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.

No the Soviet system collapsed because they went after political reforms in the 1980s over economic reforms.

The lesson China learned is to focus on the economy first, and let political reform happen gradually, naturally.

 

[2handedswordsman]

@Gatekeeper Talking about Marxism and China in Chinese economics thread is not offtopic at all. I think it is the topic depending the way you see it. Or Xi for example like @BrightFuture said.

@manqiangrexue Marxism is not a dogma. Many "marxists" tried to make it a dogma and failed. Marxism is based in dialectical materialism, a philosophical current that prevents itself of being a dogma simply because is dialectical. The way CPC works Marxism is like a dialogue between capitalism and socialism. But you have to be aware to understand this. For example recently rumors say that China is opening up it's financial sector to foreign entities. Not giving up their banks to foreigners of course, just opening up to foreign capital. From a neoliberal view this seems like a win of capitalism, the final castle of commies have fallen etc. From an unorthodox marxist view, this move will motivate huge amount of foreign money to come to China, ( Western banks and funds thirsty for profits will run immediately, only a constitutional ban like Trump wars can prevent this but, i'm not sure they can since most of them are Cayman entities ) but not in the form of stonks and stuck there for speculation (you know about the limitations of stock markets in China ) but in capital and push forward even more the Chinese economy. This means that huge amount of stuck $$ will directly convert to RMB and pour in to the thriving Chinese economy which means, goodbye my good dollar backed on a dead economy , no one supports you any more Given this, adding the creation of the digital yuan which is a currency out of the banking system, you can carry it in your phone even off grid and without bankers and banking fees, leads me to think that PRC is trying to free the market from the bankers, the capitalists.

And then i woke up Thank you for the interesting conversation

 

[quantumlight]

 

[bobdole]

Not giving up their banks to foreigners of course, just opening up to foreign capital. From a neoliberal view this seems like a win of capitalism, the final castle of commies have fallen etc.

Curious how you think the cpc will protect against predatory neoliberal financial tactics. (Ie shorting companies) Is it an accepted risk to gain leverage against wall street?

 

[2handedswordsman]

Curious how you think the cpc will protect against predatory neoliberal financial tactics. (Ie shorting companies) Is it an accepted risk to gain leverage against wall street?

Curious too. Probably like the way of Jack Ma's situation. Real Gangsta. But i think CPC will set the rules just like the joint companies in free economic zones, IP's and others Trump was bitching of. Trump was late about 3 decades to see the trap set by Deng Xiaoping LOL I'm not sounding like me