Econlib Resources
Subscribe to EconLog
XML (Full articles)RDF (Excerpts) Feedburner (One-click subscriptions) Subscribe by author
Bryan CaplanDavid Henderson Garett Jones More
FAQ
(Instructions and more options)
|
TRACKBACKS (3 to date)
TrackBack URL: http://econlog.econlib.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/462
The author at China Law Blog in a related article titled China Through Rose Colored Glasses, Darkly writes:
COMMENTS (9 to date)
daveg writes:
Yeah, and this is killing china's growth rate. They should just open up all their companies to foreign ownership and pull down all trade barriers, allow foreigners to buy land, newspapers, media etc. They should also allow free immigration. Basically eliminate the borders of china. I have no doubt this would improve the lives of all Chinese people and get them away from this sad 10% growth rate they are experiencing. Posted February 27, 2006 1:40 PM
Patrick writes:
10% growth is not that impressive for a country with a per capita GDP far less than that of Mexico. China should be as rich as Japan today (which is to say, almost five times richer than it is now). That it isn't is a colossal tragedy. Posted February 27, 2006 8:16 PM
john writes:
Any examples of countries with a higher growth rate, at any per capita GDP? Posted February 28, 2006 10:50 AM
Ivan Kirigin writes:
daveg, is the suggestion that the central managers of China's economy are better than a distributed market system? I would say the story in China is amazing growth despite the level of government intervention. Further, if you look at the banking sector, where there are so many underperforming loans, it is clear that the current system is very unsustainable. Posted February 28, 2006 11:05 AM
john writes:
So, you think China would be better off pursuing the policies listed by daveg? You seriously don't think such policies would cause huge social unrest, conflict and other undesired effects? Posted February 28, 2006 11:17 AM
john writes:
10% growth is not that impressive for a country with a per capita GDP far less than that of Mexico. Well from this (see link below) data 10% is the best you can find for any country (for year 2000), so I think you mispoke when you said 10% growth is not very impressive. It is extremely impressive for any country, but it is incredible for a country of 1 billion people. Simply incredible. It would seem that a controlled economy can do quite well, if the right controls are applied. Posted February 28, 2006 10:00 PM
john writes:
Another data point that stands out is Singapore: Singapore: 10.1% (2000 est.) This country has a reasonable per capita GDP and is about as far away from lassie fair as it gets. Posted February 28, 2006 11:16 PM
Patrick writes:
According to this list, several countries have exceeded China's growth rate in 2005. http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2003rank.html "Catch-up growth" is something often seen in poor countries, and China is still poor (per capita GDP of $6,200/yr--compare to Mexico's $10,000/yr). I don't see why the size of China's population should make the rate of GDP growth more impressive. Both large and small countries have experienced rapid industrialization. When Japan and South Korea underwent the same rapid industrialization, their growth rates were even better. The quality of their institutions was better than that of China (although they were, and remain to this day, worse than those of the United States). However, institutional deficiencies are reflected less in growth rates then they are in the level of affluence achieved once the catch-up growth is over. Whereas Japan has settled in at about 70% of the per capita GDP level of the U.S., China won't make it that far absent stunning reform. Yes, a controlled economy can do "quite well," if that means grow fast for a while before bogging down at a level of affluence far below that of its neighbors with more liberalized economies. Posted February 28, 2006 11:27 PM
john writes:
Hmm, lots of example of high GDP countries with high growth rates and highly protected and nationalistic economies as well. A very good one is singapore: purchasing power parity - $27,800 (2004 est.) You also have Japan, S. Korea, Germany, Israel, as well as the Nordic socialist countries. So I remain unconvinced. Posted March 1, 2006 11:16 PM
Comments for this entry
have been closed
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||