[ocrenter]

has anyone looked on craigslist to see if someone is selling a built-in cappuccino machine out there?

[ocrenter]

has anyone looked on craigslist to see if someone is selling a built-in cappuccino machine out there?

[ocrenter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]OCR: Why no mention of the Japanese Keiretsu or MITI? I would hazard a guess, but I’m curious as to why neither is mentioned along with SoKorea and Taiwan.[/quote]

Japan was not mentioned because the national starting point was different. Japan’s post-war rise was basically in parallel with post-war Europe. Japan and Europe were essentially developed economies that were destroyed by the war. Rebuilding of economies like that was different than economies that were pre-industrial.

S.Korea and Taiwan are more comparable with China because all three were in essence agrarian societies after WWII/Chinese Civil War/Korean War. The path to development started from the ground up, not a rebuilding situation that Japan was.

[quote]As far as comparing SoKorea and Taiwan to China, you’d want to start with comparing the competency of the actual governments themselves. China, like the Soviet Union before, is incompetent and at all levels of government. No other way to put it. While SoKorea and Taiwan did indeed emplace something approximating centrally planned autarky, it doesn’t come close to China’s Communist Party in terms of “policies and procedures”.[/quote]

Taiwan’s and S.Korea’s authoritarian one party governments were just as incompetent and corrupt at all levels of government. The competency and transparency came after the economies developed and the middle class became the majority. Basically, as the population became more developed, they demanded more from the respective governments and the governments complied.

[quote]Beyond that, I’d offer that China’s educational system is nowhere the task necessary to bring a country of that size, populated with largely subsistence farmers, forward to a point where the average person is earning $20K – $25K per year. Where does China rank in terms of Top 100 International Universities?[/quote]

China’s got a very competitive education system. education is prized in the entire East Asia as a whole, China is no exception. in fact, you may even say it is too competitive and cut throat. are Chinese universities competitive to America in term of innovations? absolutely not. But remember, China is at a different stage of development. Development is what it does best, innovation comes after development.

[quote]You mention dealing with each of the 40 Chinese provinces as a separate city-state or country. I wouldn’t disagree with that assessment, but, unfortunately, the Chinese government does NOT treat each province separately. Its a centrally planned government and when those government mandates and edicts filter down to the local level, you’re now encountering the very people Brian mentioned above: Corrupt petty officials, who also lack any sort of technical or policy-driven training.[/quote]

all of the negatives you see in China are mostly true. They do have a lot of corrupt and uneducated officials. But as a Taiwanese, I’ve seen Taiwan’s rapid rise from bottom of 3rd world to 1st world status within 40 years. And China’s rise is eerily similar. All of the negative comments about the CCP now are in essence carbon copy criticisms toward Taiwan’s KMT back in the days.

China is obviously much bigger and will end up facing more social unrest issues. It will also be much harsher in its approach regarding social unrest. But China’s population will back the government in its harsh crackdowns because the population is willing to tolerate that lack of freedom in exchange for speedier economic development.

[ocrenter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]OCR: Why no mention of the Japanese Keiretsu or MITI? I would hazard a guess, but I’m curious as to why neither is mentioned along with SoKorea and Taiwan.[/quote]

Japan was not mentioned because the national starting point was different. Japan’s post-war rise was basically in parallel with post-war Europe. Japan and Europe were essentially developed economies that were destroyed by the war. Rebuilding of economies like that was different than economies that were pre-industrial.

S.Korea and Taiwan are more comparable with China because all three were in essence agrarian societies after WWII/Chinese Civil War/Korean War. The path to development started from the ground up, not a rebuilding situation that Japan was.

[quote]As far as comparing SoKorea and Taiwan to China, you’d want to start with comparing the competency of the actual governments themselves. China, like the Soviet Union before, is incompetent and at all levels of government. No other way to put it. While SoKorea and Taiwan did indeed emplace something approximating centrally planned autarky, it doesn’t come close to China’s Communist Party in terms of “policies and procedures”.[/quote]

Taiwan’s and S.Korea’s authoritarian one party governments were just as incompetent and corrupt at all levels of government. The competency and transparency came after the economies developed and the middle class became the majority. Basically, as the population became more developed, they demanded more from the respective governments and the governments complied.

[quote]Beyond that, I’d offer that China’s educational system is nowhere the task necessary to bring a country of that size, populated with largely subsistence farmers, forward to a point where the average person is earning $20K – $25K per year. Where does China rank in terms of Top 100 International Universities?[/quote]

China’s got a very competitive education system. education is prized in the entire East Asia as a whole, China is no exception. in fact, you may even say it is too competitive and cut throat. are Chinese universities competitive to America in term of innovations? absolutely not. But remember, China is at a different stage of development. Development is what it does best, innovation comes after development.

[quote]You mention dealing with each of the 40 Chinese provinces as a separate city-state or country. I wouldn’t disagree with that assessment, but, unfortunately, the Chinese government does NOT treat each province separately. Its a centrally planned government and when those government mandates and edicts filter down to the local level, you’re now encountering the very people Brian mentioned above: Corrupt petty officials, who also lack any sort of technical or policy-driven training.[/quote]

all of the negatives you see in China are mostly true. They do have a lot of corrupt and uneducated officials. But as a Taiwanese, I’ve seen Taiwan’s rapid rise from bottom of 3rd world to 1st world status within 40 years. And China’s rise is eerily similar. All of the negative comments about the CCP now are in essence carbon copy criticisms toward Taiwan’s KMT back in the days.

China is obviously much bigger and will end up facing more social unrest issues. It will also be much harsher in its approach regarding social unrest. But China’s population will back the government in its harsh crackdowns because the population is willing to tolerate that lack of freedom in exchange for speedier economic development.

[ocrenter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]OCR: Why no mention of the Japanese Keiretsu or MITI? I would hazard a guess, but I’m curious as to why neither is mentioned along with SoKorea and Taiwan.[/quote]

Japan was not mentioned because the national starting point was different. Japan’s post-war rise was basically in parallel with post-war Europe. Japan and Europe were essentially developed economies that were destroyed by the war. Rebuilding of economies like that was different than economies that were pre-industrial.

S.Korea and Taiwan are more comparable with China because all three were in essence agrarian societies after WWII/Chinese Civil War/Korean War. The path to development started from the ground up, not a rebuilding situation that Japan was.

[quote]As far as comparing SoKorea and Taiwan to China, you’d want to start with comparing the competency of the actual governments themselves. China, like the Soviet Union before, is incompetent and at all levels of government. No other way to put it. While SoKorea and Taiwan did indeed emplace something approximating centrally planned autarky, it doesn’t come close to China’s Communist Party in terms of “policies and procedures”.[/quote]

Taiwan’s and S.Korea’s authoritarian one party governments were just as incompetent and corrupt at all levels of government. The competency and transparency came after the economies developed and the middle class became the majority. Basically, as the population became more developed, they demanded more from the respective governments and the governments complied.

[quote]Beyond that, I’d offer that China’s educational system is nowhere the task necessary to bring a country of that size, populated with largely subsistence farmers, forward to a point where the average person is earning $20K – $25K per year. Where does China rank in terms of Top 100 International Universities?[/quote]

China’s got a very competitive education system. education is prized in the entire East Asia as a whole, China is no exception. in fact, you may even say it is too competitive and cut throat. are Chinese universities competitive to America in term of innovations? absolutely not. But remember, China is at a different stage of development. Development is what it does best, innovation comes after development.

[quote]You mention dealing with each of the 40 Chinese provinces as a separate city-state or country. I wouldn’t disagree with that assessment, but, unfortunately, the Chinese government does NOT treat each province separately. Its a centrally planned government and when those government mandates and edicts filter down to the local level, you’re now encountering the very people Brian mentioned above: Corrupt petty officials, who also lack any sort of technical or policy-driven training.[/quote]

all of the negatives you see in China are mostly true. They do have a lot of corrupt and uneducated officials. But as a Taiwanese, I’ve seen Taiwan’s rapid rise from bottom of 3rd world to 1st world status within 40 years. And China’s rise is eerily similar. All of the negative comments about the CCP now are in essence carbon copy criticisms toward Taiwan’s KMT back in the days.

China is obviously much bigger and will end up facing more social unrest issues. It will also be much harsher in its approach regarding social unrest. But China’s population will back the government in its harsh crackdowns because the population is willing to tolerate that lack of freedom in exchange for speedier economic development.

[ocrenter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]OCR: Why no mention of the Japanese Keiretsu or MITI? I would hazard a guess, but I’m curious as to why neither is mentioned along with SoKorea and Taiwan.[/quote]

Japan was not mentioned because the national starting point was different. Japan’s post-war rise was basically in parallel with post-war Europe. Japan and Europe were essentially developed economies that were destroyed by the war. Rebuilding of economies like that was different than economies that were pre-industrial.

S.Korea and Taiwan are more comparable with China because all three were in essence agrarian societies after WWII/Chinese Civil War/Korean War. The path to development started from the ground up, not a rebuilding situation that Japan was.

[quote]As far as comparing SoKorea and Taiwan to China, you’d want to start with comparing the competency of the actual governments themselves. China, like the Soviet Union before, is incompetent and at all levels of government. No other way to put it. While SoKorea and Taiwan did indeed emplace something approximating centrally planned autarky, it doesn’t come close to China’s Communist Party in terms of “policies and procedures”.[/quote]

Taiwan’s and S.Korea’s authoritarian one party governments were just as incompetent and corrupt at all levels of government. The competency and transparency came after the economies developed and the middle class became the majority. Basically, as the population became more developed, they demanded more from the respective governments and the governments complied.

[quote]Beyond that, I’d offer that China’s educational system is nowhere the task necessary to bring a country of that size, populated with largely subsistence farmers, forward to a point where the average person is earning $20K – $25K per year. Where does China rank in terms of Top 100 International Universities?[/quote]

China’s got a very competitive education system. education is prized in the entire East Asia as a whole, China is no exception. in fact, you may even say it is too competitive and cut throat. are Chinese universities competitive to America in term of innovations? absolutely not. But remember, China is at a different stage of development. Development is what it does best, innovation comes after development.

[quote]You mention dealing with each of the 40 Chinese provinces as a separate city-state or country. I wouldn’t disagree with that assessment, but, unfortunately, the Chinese government does NOT treat each province separately. Its a centrally planned government and when those government mandates and edicts filter down to the local level, you’re now encountering the very people Brian mentioned above: Corrupt petty officials, who also lack any sort of technical or policy-driven training.[/quote]

all of the negatives you see in China are mostly true. They do have a lot of corrupt and uneducated officials. But as a Taiwanese, I’ve seen Taiwan’s rapid rise from bottom of 3rd world to 1st world status within 40 years. And China’s rise is eerily similar. All of the negative comments about the CCP now are in essence carbon copy criticisms toward Taiwan’s KMT back in the days.

China is obviously much bigger and will end up facing more social unrest issues. It will also be much harsher in its approach regarding social unrest. But China’s population will back the government in its harsh crackdowns because the population is willing to tolerate that lack of freedom in exchange for speedier economic development.

[ocrenter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]OCR: Why no mention of the Japanese Keiretsu or MITI? I would hazard a guess, but I’m curious as to why neither is mentioned along with SoKorea and Taiwan.[/quote]

Japan was not mentioned because the national starting point was different. Japan’s post-war rise was basically in parallel with post-war Europe. Japan and Europe were essentially developed economies that were destroyed by the war. Rebuilding of economies like that was different than economies that were pre-industrial.

S.Korea and Taiwan are more comparable with China because all three were in essence agrarian societies after WWII/Chinese Civil War/Korean War. The path to development started from the ground up, not a rebuilding situation that Japan was.

[quote]As far as comparing SoKorea and Taiwan to China, you’d want to start with comparing the competency of the actual governments themselves. China, like the Soviet Union before, is incompetent and at all levels of government. No other way to put it. While SoKorea and Taiwan did indeed emplace something approximating centrally planned autarky, it doesn’t come close to China’s Communist Party in terms of “policies and procedures”.[/quote]

Taiwan’s and S.Korea’s authoritarian one party governments were just as incompetent and corrupt at all levels of government. The competency and transparency came after the economies developed and the middle class became the majority. Basically, as the population became more developed, they demanded more from the respective governments and the governments complied.

[quote]Beyond that, I’d offer that China’s educational system is nowhere the task necessary to bring a country of that size, populated with largely subsistence farmers, forward to a point where the average person is earning $20K – $25K per year. Where does China rank in terms of Top 100 International Universities?[/quote]

China’s got a very competitive education system. education is prized in the entire East Asia as a whole, China is no exception. in fact, you may even say it is too competitive and cut throat. are Chinese universities competitive to America in term of innovations? absolutely not. But remember, China is at a different stage of development. Development is what it does best, innovation comes after development.

[quote]You mention dealing with each of the 40 Chinese provinces as a separate city-state or country. I wouldn’t disagree with that assessment, but, unfortunately, the Chinese government does NOT treat each province separately. Its a centrally planned government and when those government mandates and edicts filter down to the local level, you’re now encountering the very people Brian mentioned above: Corrupt petty officials, who also lack any sort of technical or policy-driven training.[/quote]

all of the negatives you see in China are mostly true. They do have a lot of corrupt and uneducated officials. But as a Taiwanese, I’ve seen Taiwan’s rapid rise from bottom of 3rd world to 1st world status within 40 years. And China’s rise is eerily similar. All of the negative comments about the CCP now are in essence carbon copy criticisms toward Taiwan’s KMT back in the days.

China is obviously much bigger and will end up facing more social unrest issues. It will also be much harsher in its approach regarding social unrest. But China’s population will back the government in its harsh crackdowns because the population is willing to tolerate that lack of freedom in exchange for speedier economic development.

[ocrenter]

The problem with China-nay-sayers is they do not understand the Chinese playbook, which was pirated word for word from the South Korean and Taiwanese editions. The scary part for most folks is that South Korea + Taiwan = a single province in China in population size.

The Chinese is following the same pathway paved by the South Koreans and the Taiwanese. Both of those countries were under what we would call “capitalist authoritarian regimes” who guided growth and development until the economy took off.

If you look at the South Korean and Taiwanese GDP growth chart from the 60’s, both were showing steady upward trend, then both took off in the 90’s, but instead of continued skyward trend (which was what happened to Japan and its bubble), both nations then bended back to slow upward trend after reaching developed nation status in 00’s. That second bending of the curve received a lot of bad press in both countries, but it was the right course in retrospect. If you count, we are looking at 40-50 years post development for that 2nd bending of the curve to develop.

If you are afraid of a Chinese bubble, that is what you watch for. If you see that skyward trend continuing even after the average Chinese PPP per capita reach beyond $20-25k, then yes, you got a bubble forming. But it goes deeper then that. Because China is so big, you got to look at its ~40 provinces/municipalities as 40 countries individually.

For example, Shanghai (population of 16 million) currently has a PPP per capita of $20k. we should start to see Shanghainese growth rate slowing down over the next decade as that municipality reach “developed status.” If it doesn’t, then there’s a problem. What should happen is Shanghainese growth rate will flatten as investors depart Shanghai and attack inland provinces next door (kinda like how Hong Kong investors went to Guangdong and how Taiwanese investors went to Fujian).

[img_assist|nid=12585|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=446|height=275]

The graph here shows the Shanghainese GDP growth. now the 2008 decline from 14% growth to 9.7% may be due to the global recession. but the idea here is we should be seeing a slowing from double digit growth to single digit growth for the city. But the rest of China will continue high flying at double digit growth and that is ok, and not indicative of a brewing bubble.

[ocrenter]

The problem with China-nay-sayers is they do not understand the Chinese playbook, which was pirated word for word from the South Korean and Taiwanese editions. The scary part for most folks is that South Korea + Taiwan = a single province in China in population size.

The Chinese is following the same pathway paved by the South Koreans and the Taiwanese. Both of those countries were under what we would call “capitalist authoritarian regimes” who guided growth and development until the economy took off.

If you look at the South Korean and Taiwanese GDP growth chart from the 60’s, both were showing steady upward trend, then both took off in the 90’s, but instead of continued skyward trend (which was what happened to Japan and its bubble), both nations then bended back to slow upward trend after reaching developed nation status in 00’s. That second bending of the curve received a lot of bad press in both countries, but it was the right course in retrospect. If you count, we are looking at 40-50 years post development for that 2nd bending of the curve to develop.

If you are afraid of a Chinese bubble, that is what you watch for. If you see that skyward trend continuing even after the average Chinese PPP per capita reach beyond $20-25k, then yes, you got a bubble forming. But it goes deeper then that. Because China is so big, you got to look at its ~40 provinces/municipalities as 40 countries individually.

For example, Shanghai (population of 16 million) currently has a PPP per capita of $20k. we should start to see Shanghainese growth rate slowing down over the next decade as that municipality reach “developed status.” If it doesn’t, then there’s a problem. What should happen is Shanghainese growth rate will flatten as investors depart Shanghai and attack inland provinces next door (kinda like how Hong Kong investors went to Guangdong and how Taiwanese investors went to Fujian).

[img_assist|nid=12585|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=446|height=275]

The graph here shows the Shanghainese GDP growth. now the 2008 decline from 14% growth to 9.7% may be due to the global recession. but the idea here is we should be seeing a slowing from double digit growth to single digit growth for the city. But the rest of China will continue high flying at double digit growth and that is ok, and not indicative of a brewing bubble.

[ocrenter]

The problem with China-nay-sayers is they do not understand the Chinese playbook, which was pirated word for word from the South Korean and Taiwanese editions. The scary part for most folks is that South Korea + Taiwan = a single province in China in population size.

The Chinese is following the same pathway paved by the South Koreans and the Taiwanese. Both of those countries were under what we would call “capitalist authoritarian regimes” who guided growth and development until the economy took off.

If you look at the South Korean and Taiwanese GDP growth chart from the 60’s, both were showing steady upward trend, then both took off in the 90’s, but instead of continued skyward trend (which was what happened to Japan and its bubble), both nations then bended back to slow upward trend after reaching developed nation status in 00’s. That second bending of the curve received a lot of bad press in both countries, but it was the right course in retrospect. If you count, we are looking at 40-50 years post development for that 2nd bending of the curve to develop.

If you are afraid of a Chinese bubble, that is what you watch for. If you see that skyward trend continuing even after the average Chinese PPP per capita reach beyond $20-25k, then yes, you got a bubble forming. But it goes deeper then that. Because China is so big, you got to look at its ~40 provinces/municipalities as 40 countries individually.

For example, Shanghai (population of 16 million) currently has a PPP per capita of $20k. we should start to see Shanghainese growth rate slowing down over the next decade as that municipality reach “developed status.” If it doesn’t, then there’s a problem. What should happen is Shanghainese growth rate will flatten as investors depart Shanghai and attack inland provinces next door (kinda like how Hong Kong investors went to Guangdong and how Taiwanese investors went to Fujian).

[img_assist|nid=12585|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=446|height=275]

The graph here shows the Shanghainese GDP growth. now the 2008 decline from 14% growth to 9.7% may be due to the global recession. but the idea here is we should be seeing a slowing from double digit growth to single digit growth for the city. But the rest of China will continue high flying at double digit growth and that is ok, and not indicative of a brewing bubble.

[ocrenter]

The problem with China-nay-sayers is they do not understand the Chinese playbook, which was pirated word for word from the South Korean and Taiwanese editions. The scary part for most folks is that South Korea + Taiwan = a single province in China in population size.

The Chinese is following the same pathway paved by the South Koreans and the Taiwanese. Both of those countries were under what we would call “capitalist authoritarian regimes” who guided growth and development until the economy took off.

If you look at the South Korean and Taiwanese GDP growth chart from the 60’s, both were showing steady upward trend, then both took off in the 90’s, but instead of continued skyward trend (which was what happened to Japan and its bubble), both nations then bended back to slow upward trend after reaching developed nation status in 00’s. That second bending of the curve received a lot of bad press in both countries, but it was the right course in retrospect. If you count, we are looking at 40-50 years post development for that 2nd bending of the curve to develop.

If you are afraid of a Chinese bubble, that is what you watch for. If you see that skyward trend continuing even after the average Chinese PPP per capita reach beyond $20-25k, then yes, you got a bubble forming. But it goes deeper then that. Because China is so big, you got to look at its ~40 provinces/municipalities as 40 countries individually.

For example, Shanghai (population of 16 million) currently has a PPP per capita of $20k. we should start to see Shanghainese growth rate slowing down over the next decade as that municipality reach “developed status.” If it doesn’t, then there’s a problem. What should happen is Shanghainese growth rate will flatten as investors depart Shanghai and attack inland provinces next door (kinda like how Hong Kong investors went to Guangdong and how Taiwanese investors went to Fujian).

[img_assist|nid=12585|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=446|height=275]

The graph here shows the Shanghainese GDP growth. now the 2008 decline from 14% growth to 9.7% may be due to the global recession. but the idea here is we should be seeing a slowing from double digit growth to single digit growth for the city. But the rest of China will continue high flying at double digit growth and that is ok, and not indicative of a brewing bubble.

[ocrenter]

The problem with China-nay-sayers is they do not understand the Chinese playbook, which was pirated word for word from the South Korean and Taiwanese editions. The scary part for most folks is that South Korea + Taiwan = a single province in China in population size.

The Chinese is following the same pathway paved by the South Koreans and the Taiwanese. Both of those countries were under what we would call “capitalist authoritarian regimes” who guided growth and development until the economy took off.

If you look at the South Korean and Taiwanese GDP growth chart from the 60’s, both were showing steady upward trend, then both took off in the 90’s, but instead of continued skyward trend (which was what happened to Japan and its bubble), both nations then bended back to slow upward trend after reaching developed nation status in 00’s. That second bending of the curve received a lot of bad press in both countries, but it was the right course in retrospect. If you count, we are looking at 40-50 years post development for that 2nd bending of the curve to develop.

If you are afraid of a Chinese bubble, that is what you watch for. If you see that skyward trend continuing even after the average Chinese PPP per capita reach beyond $20-25k, then yes, you got a bubble forming. But it goes deeper then that. Because China is so big, you got to look at its ~40 provinces/municipalities as 40 countries individually.

For example, Shanghai (population of 16 million) currently has a PPP per capita of $20k. we should start to see Shanghainese growth rate slowing down over the next decade as that municipality reach “developed status.” If it doesn’t, then there’s a problem. What should happen is Shanghainese growth rate will flatten as investors depart Shanghai and attack inland provinces next door (kinda like how Hong Kong investors went to Guangdong and how Taiwanese investors went to Fujian).

[img_assist|nid=12585|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=446|height=275]

The graph here shows the Shanghainese GDP growth. now the 2008 decline from 14% growth to 9.7% may be due to the global recession. but the idea here is we should be seeing a slowing from double digit growth to single digit growth for the city. But the rest of China will continue high flying at double digit growth and that is ok, and not indicative of a brewing bubble.

[ocrenter]

[img_assist|nid=12578|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=391|height=354]

Well, at least the Daniels are in very good company. Check out their neighborhood, looks like the whole mountain is foreclosing. I wonder how many carbon copies of the Daniels are in that neighborhood. Talk about birds of a feather flock together.

[ocrenter]

[img_assist|nid=12578|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=391|height=354]

Well, at least the Daniels are in very good company. Check out their neighborhood, looks like the whole mountain is foreclosing. I wonder how many carbon copies of the Daniels are in that neighborhood. Talk about birds of a feather flock together.

[ocrenter]

[img_assist|nid=12578|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=391|height=354]

Well, at least the Daniels are in very good company. Check out their neighborhood, looks like the whole mountain is foreclosing. I wonder how many carbon copies of the Daniels are in that neighborhood. Talk about birds of a feather flock together.

[Author]

Posts