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/551
The author at The Filter^ in a related article titled In defense of methodological individualism writes:
COMMENTS (6 to date)
Lancelot Finn writes:
If you look at the last three years, I'll bet that the global trend is towards convergence even if you take China and India out of the equation. See my article: "The World Economy is Booming." Posted August 23, 2006 3:15 PM
Barkley Rosser writes:
Well, regarding the Pleasant Valley photo, it is perfectly possible for three directions out of an intersection to end up at the same location, although probably arriving at it from three different directions. Posted August 23, 2006 3:55 PM
Ronald Rutherford writes:
Liked the article also! Posted August 23, 2006 8:19 PM
Bruce Charlton writes:
I certainly agree that the really 'good news' about the recent reduction in world poverty requires much wider circulation - most people (at least the 'liberal elites') seem to believe the opposite. Also, it emphasizes that the standard modernization methods adopted by China and India seem to work, whereas in Africa the more socialistic approach - Fair Trade, community development, and all the rest - seems to be ineffective. Of course there are cultural differences, but still... However, when looking at questions such as whether former British colonies did better than other nations, there is a reasonable case for counting each political entity as a unit. wrt India, I read somewhere that in c1950 everyone expected India to be a big economic success but that democracy would not survive - however the opposite happened. Maybe India's British political and administrative legacy helped preserve the democracy, even as the mid-twentieth-century socialistic aspect of British influence crippled its economy. Posted August 24, 2006 8:15 AM
Mr. Econotarian writes:
India and China have shown that key elements of governance organization are irrelevant to the economy. India had democracy for a long time before it enacted anti-socialist economic reforms and began rapid growth. China had a dictatorship under which it starved tens of millions to death, but today the same central governing structure has unleashed massive economic growth. Posted August 24, 2006 9:39 AM
TGGP writes:
The estimate in "IQ and Wealth of Nations" was that a bit more than half the the variance in growth between countries can be attributed to the different governments and a bit less than half is due to the different people in countries. I might have mentioned this before, but you guys have to watch this Gapminder video. It's pretty long but very good. Posted August 24, 2006 9:53 AM
Comments for this entry
have been closed
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||