I’m glad that China has taken some steps away from communism. According to Economic Freedom of the World, China was one of 10-worst nations for economic liberty back in 1980 and they’ve since climbed to 92nd place out of 141 nations.
I’ve even offered a small bit of praise for China’s shift to a more business-friendly environment, and I was greatly amused when the head of China’s sovereign wealth fund mocked the Europeans for destructive welfare state policies.
That being said, 92nd place is still a very anemic rank, far below the first- and second-place jurisdictions, Hong Kong and Singapore.
So I was flabbergasted when Andy Stern, a former union boss and long-time Obama ally, wrote a column for today’s Wall Street Journal praising the efficiency and vitality of China’s planned economy.
You probably think I’m pulling your leg and/or deliberately misrepresenting what he wrote, but his article was titled “China’s Superior Economic Model.”
And just in case you think that’s the fault of editors and he couldn’t possible say such a thing, let’s look through the piece.
He starts off praising the goals of China’s latest five-year plan.
The aims: a 7% annual economic growth rate; a $640 billion investment in renewable energy; construction of six million homes; and expanding next-generation IT, clean-energy vehicles, biotechnology, high-end manufacturing and environmental protection—all while promoting social equity and rural development. Some Americans are drawing lessons from this. Last month, the China Daily quoted Orville Schell, who directs the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society, as saying: “I think we have come to realize the ability to plan is exactly what is missing in America.”
Gee, that sounds so uplifting and inspirational. But there’s one tiny problem. China is still a very poor country. Here’s a chart showing the 2010 data from the World Bank.
Maybe I’m a crazy free-market ideologue, but I’d rather copy the Singapore or Hong Kong economic model.
But if I can’t choose one of those Asian tigers, I’ll stick with the U.S. system. Americans, after all, are about six times better off than the Chinese. Heck, China is still behind Albania.
Mr. Stern then writes about the supposed failures of “free-market extremism” in the United States.
The conservative-preferred, free-market fundamentalist, shareholder-only model—so successful in the 20th century—is being thrown onto the trash heap of history in the 21st century. In an era when countries need to become economic teams, Team USA’s results—a jobless decade, 30 years of flat median wages, a trade deficit, a shrinking middle class and phenomenal gains in wealth but only for the top 1%—are pathetic. …This should motivate leaders to rethink, rather than double down on an empirically failing free-market extremism. As painful and humbling as it may be, America needs to do what a once-dominant business or sports team would do when the tide turns: study the ingredients of its competitors’ success.
Since this is a pro-family blog, I won’t repeat the inappropriate words that came out of my mouth upon reading these passages.
Instead, I’ll simply call your attention to this post, which shows how America’s score in the Economic Freedom of the World ranking declined during the past decade. Indeed, the United States was among the five nations with the biggest declines over that 10-year period and the United States dropped from 3rd to 10th during those years.
If that was a period of “free-market fundamentalist” policies, then I guess I need to start cheering for socialism.
I’ll conclude by doing one of my favorite things – quoting myself. Here’s a bit of what I wrote last year.
China has been growing in recent decades, but it’s almost impossible not to grow when you start at the bottom – which is where China was in the late 1970s thanks to decades of communist oppression and mismanagement. And the growth they have experienced certainly has not been enough to overtake other nations based on measures that compare living standards. …This is not to sneer at the positive changes in China. Hundreds of millions of people have experienced big increases in living standards. …But China still has a long way to go if the goal is a vibrant and rich free-market economy.
I’ve probably exhausted everyone’s interest in this topic, but if anyone’s a glutton for punishment, I was part of a debate on English-language Russian TV about Chinese and American economic policy.
[…] was sour about China’s economic prospects more than 10 years ago, and these remarks from earlier this year show that I still think China’s economy is being […]
[…] one of my long-standing observations is that China’s economy is not nearly as strong as some people think. Which is why I’m […]
[…] readers know that I periodically pour cold water on the notion that China is an economic […]
[…] is not going to surpass the United States as the world’s dominant […]
[…] I’m also baffled that so many people view China as a successful economic model when living standards in that […]
[…] I’m also baffled that so many people view China as a successful economic model when living standards in that nation […]
Reblogged this on boudica.us.
[…] bad news, though, is that China is still a relatively poor nation. Living standards are not only far below American levels, but per-capita economic output is also much lower than the levels in other East Asian […]
[…] such as China still way behind the western world, a point I’ve been making for a long […]
[…] such as China still way behind the western world, a point I’ve been making for a long […]
[…] bottom line is that China is not close to the United States. It’s not even catching […]
[…] that per-capita living standards are much lower in China than they are in the United States, I’m baffled that Schwab thinks it’s a good idea to […]
[…] obviously is bad news, but I repeated my long-held view in this interview that excessive government intervention is the greatest threat to […]
[…] coronavirus obviously is bad news, but I repeated my long-held view in this interview that excessive government intervention is the greatest threat to China’s […]
[…] other words, notwithstanding all the growth China has enjoyed, it is still well behind the United […]
[…] impressive growth since it partially liberalized its economy in the late 1900s, but it will remain far behind the United States unless – as I recently explained on CNBC – there is a new wave of […]
[…] I have written about how China got great results – especially huge reductions in poverty – thanks to partial economic liberalization last century. But those reforms were just a step in the right direction. The country currently ranks only #107 according to Economic Freedom of the World, largely because so much of the economy is hampered by subsidies, regulation, protectionism, and cronyism. Sweeping pro-market reforms are needed if China’s leaders want their country to become rich. […]
[…] bad news is that China started from such a low position that per-capita income is still quite low compared to rich […]
[…] Em outras palavras, eles alcançarão os americanos (atualmente, o produto per capta nos EUA é mais de cinco vezes maior do que na China)? Ou, como muitas outras economias emergentes , eles baterão em um teto e aí […]
[…] line is that the country can become a genuine “Chinese Tiger” rather than a “paper tiger” with the right […]
[…] The “totalitarians,” which means a dictatorial state-run economy, as represented by the Soviet Union and China. […]
[…] la question: si vous viviez en Russie au Venezuela fr Chine ou au Zimbabwe aimeriez- vous l'État facilement accès à votre pécule (il soit important ou […]
[…] to your nest egg (whether it’s a lot or a little) if you lived in Russia? Or Venezuela? Or China? Or […]
[…] But at least it’s a series that sort of has a happy ending. The Soviet Union collapsed and China is now only nominally communist. […]
[…] incomprehensible misery that communism caused in places such as Cuba, Cambodia, and North Korea. Or China back in the Mao […]
[…] Others point to rapid growth in China, but that’s rather silly since improvements in that country’s economy are the result of partial liberalization. In any event, it’s not that difficult to have rapid growth rates when starting from a very low level. But even with a couple of decades of good growth, living standards in China are still relatively low. […]
[…] Others point to rapid growth in China, but that’s rather silly since improvements in that country’s economy are the result of partial liberalization. In any event, it’s not that difficult to have rapid growth rates when starting from a very low level. But even with a couple of decades of good growth, living standards in China are still relatively low. […]
[…] column about global growth, poverty, and inequality, I realized that I’ve written several columns about economic policy in China, but never once focused on overall policy in […]
[…] column about global growth, poverty, and inequality, I realized that I’ve written several columns about economic policy in China, but never once focused on overall policy in […]
[…] political system or Putin himself. I like the Russia flat tax for the same reason that I like trade liberalization in China and Social Security reform in Chile. Every so often, bad governments stumble upon a good policy and […]
[…] political system or Putin himself. I like the Russia flat tax for the same reason that I like trade liberalization in China and Social Security reform in Chile. Every so often, bad governments stumble upon a good policy and […]
[…] if we care about living standards. After all, per-capita economic output in China is only about one-fourth of what it is in America and that’s assuming that Chinese economic numbers can be […]
[…] do with the American people or President Obama. Global poverty has fallen because nations such as China and India have abandoned collectivist autarky and joined the global […]
[…] it actually converge with the United States (right now per-capita economic output in America is more than five times higher than it is in China)? Or will China, like many other developing/transition economies, hit a ceiling […]
[…] amount of economic freedom for those three jurisdictions. Likewise, it’s not good to be Mexico, China, or North Korea, but there are degrees of statism and it’s worse to be farther to the […]
[…] of economic freedom for those three jurisdictions. Likewise, it’s not good to be Mexico, China, or North Korea, but there are degrees of statism and it’s worse to be farther to the […]
[…] about real-world socialist failure, looking at both the totalitarian version in places like Cuba, China, Venezuela, and North Korea, as well as the majoritarian version in nations such as France, Italy, […]
[…] about real-world socialist failure, looking at both the totalitarian version in places like Cuba, China, Venezuela, and North Korea, as well as the majoritarian version in nations such as France, Italy, […]
[…] living standards for ordinary Chinese citizens are far higher than they used to be. There’s still quite a way to go before China catches up to western nations, but the numbers keep […]
[…] standards for ordinary Chinese citizens are far higher than they used to be. There’s still quite a way to go before China catches up to western nations, but the numbers keep […]
[…] the way, you don’t need perfection to get climb out of poverty. China still doesn’t rank very high in Economic Freedom of the World, but it has improved its position over the past few decades and […]
[…] the way, you don’t need perfection to get climb out of poverty. China still doesn’t rank very high in Economic Freedom of the World, but it has improved its position over the past few decades and […]
[…] he list Venezuela or China, countries that have partial government ownership of the means of […]
[…] he list Venezuela or China, countries that have partial government ownership of the means of […]
[…] he list Venezuela or China, countries that have partial government ownership of the means of […]
[…] I wrote in 2010 that America didn’t need to fear the supposed Chinese economic tiger. I pointed out in 2011 that China was way behind the United […]
[…] been a lot of progress since the wretched deprivation and poverty of Mao’s era, China is still way behind the United States and other nations with more capitalistic systems. Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan are appropriate […]
[…] the comparative numbers on per-capita economic output in the interview, which is something I wrote about back in 2011. And you can click here if you want the underlying figures to confirm that Americans […]
[…] Yes, there’s been impressive growth, but it started from a very low level. As a result, per-capita economic output is still just a fraction of American levels. […]
[…] P.S. While China has moved in the right direction in recent decades, it still gets a relatively low score from Economic Freedom of the World. Which helps to explain why I think it’s silly for people to fear the supposed Chinese Tiger. […]
[…] people living on less than $1 a day. That kind of poverty is all but unheard of in the US. As Dan Mitchell points out, the overall Chinese standard of living is simply a lot lower than it is here. Their per capita GDP […]
[…] many other people, I’ve argued that the success of the overseas Chinese community (compared to their counterparts stuck in Communist China) is a damning indictment of […]
[…] other people, I’ve argued that the success of the overseas Chinese community (compared to their counterparts stuck in Communist China) is a damning indictment of […]
[…] I’m not oblivious to geopolitical concerns, I don’t worry about China becoming a more prosperous nation. Yes, more wealth could enable the nation’s dictators to finance some unwelcome aggression, but I […]
[…] I’m not oblivious to geopolitical concerns, I don’t worry about China becoming a more prosperous nation. Yes, more wealth could enable the nation’s dictators to finance some unwelcome aggression, […]
[…] problems, but will survive 2012 without crisis – I’ve already written that I’m not overly impressed by China and that I think there’s a bubble in the Chinese economy. And I’ve commented on the […]
Of all the replies I’ve seen to the Stern article, I’m surprised no one pointed out the “miracles” Stern mentioned ie ipads and iphones. That said, why doesn’t China simply plan for some miracles of its own?
[…] https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2011/12/01/chinas-economic-model-is-superior-if-you-think-u-s-l… GA_googleAddAttr("AdOpt", "1"); GA_googleAddAttr("Origin", "other"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_bg", "fafafa"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_border", "cccccc"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_text", "000000"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_link", "ca1e00"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_url", "e94325"); GA_googleAddAttr("LangId", "1"); GA_googleAddAttr("Autotag", "sports"); GA_googleAddAttr("Autotag", "business"); GA_googleAddAttr("Tag", "china"); GA_googleAddAttr("Tag", "economic-growth"); GA_googleFillSlot("wpcom_sharethrough"); Like this:LikeBe the first to like this post. […]
[…] Ross Kaminsky deals nicely with Andy Stern’s recent WSJ essay on the alleged failure of free markets. As does James Pethokoukis. And as does Dan “Bulldog” Mitchell. […]
[…] base their model on a market that has proved successful in the contemporary global economy. As Dan Mitchell points out in his blog, “International Liberty,” the most prosperous economies are those with a free […]
China’s growth was not the result of 5-year plans. It was the result of a little more market-oriented freedom starting in the late 1970’s where the economy transitioned from a largely rural agricultural economy to a more urbran industrial economy.
That same transition from rural agricultural in the South and West plus nationwide suburban development is what drove economic growth in the U.S. after WW II. That lasted until the 1970’s.
Actually China mocking European “welfare states” is rather sinister, since the typical CCP response to “useless eaters” is “Let ’em starve!”
Most of those yahoos how make up “Wall Street” wouldn’t venture near a truly free market with some one else’s money. But of course, what would a union leader know about that?
China has rocketed up to #2 partly on its on growth but also largely due to the failings of command economies in Japan, and yes, the US. If you look at the numbers,there’s no way China becomes #1 in the next 30 years, much less 2.
It also time to accept one hard fact: this is truly the post industrial phase in America. Those jobs that went to China, Vietnam, Malaysia, et al., ain’t never comin’ back. The cost/price ratio can’t be made right, especially with declining real wages, even assuming the industrial base existed, which it doesn’t. We can’t roll the world back to 1955,and it’s vital that we stop trying.This is a huge opportunity to leap forward, but most people can’t jettison the boat anchor of history. (Yes, I said “leap forward”).
As pointed out above Everyone could have a job if they are willing to work for $1 a day….
Andy Stern should love that “plan!”
[…] China’s Economic Model Is Superior…if You Think U.S. Living Standards Should Drop by 80 Percent […]
Well, I endured reading the article…
“Meanwhile, the Chinese government can boast that it has established in Western China an economic zone for cloud computing and automotive and aerospace production resulting in 12.5% annual growth and 49% growth in annual tax revenue, with wages rising more than 10% a year.”
49% / 12.5% … that sounds like that… what you call it… the Mitchell Rule?
————————————–
The scenario of HopNChange decline has been played time and again in many parts of the world, including most of Europe, even back before the European Unification Project started coercing every state into its centralized collective plan for decline. This is why I think America is doomed. The arguments are there, the scripts are ready and experience shows that voters buy them, the script will be played over. Empirical evidence shows that once a country reaches this point, decline takes a life of its own. The distance to decline is shorter than the electorate’s turning radius.
My prediction for America is that the country will partially bounce back under a feeble attempt to return to American Individualism. A watered down version of the principles of economic dynamism, something lukewarm, akin to compassionate Republicanism which will slow down the decline for a short while. Alas, it won’t be enough to undo all that has been done (heck Obamacare incentives to (not) produce have not even kicked in yet and we’re already going south!) so the public will conclude that conservatism does not work either, might as well go back to a renewed version of HopNChange.
The pursuit of prosperity through a centrally planned flatter effort-reward curve continues…. and the decline accelerates…
[…] people living on less than $1 a day. That kind of poverty is all but unheard of in the US. As Dan Mitchell points out, the overall Chinese standard of living is simply a lot lower than it is here. Their per capita GDP […]
I am not a fan of China.
However, the western world’s expanding predicament is nothing but manifestation of the gigantic economic change unfolding in relative economic power between East and West.
The utterly suicidal folly that seems to have overcome the western democracy voter can be summarized in one paragraph:
At a time when a sea of humanity in China and the Developing world, amounting to three billion people, have finally discovered and started implementing the benefits of decentralization and the natural production motives of letting individuals work for themselves and their families rather than being coerced into busy work for distant unknowns,…
…The less than one billion lemmings of the Western world are resting their hopes for maintaining a standard of living six times the world average on adopting the very policies now rejected by the partially liberated, much larger, emerging world: Mandatory collectivism.
What will be, for heaven’s sake, the inevitable outcome?
The delusion of HopNChange is so strong that people are willing to look at China and draw exactly the wrong conclusions, i.e. that its success is due to whatever central planning and mandatory collectivism remains in the process Chinese Individual liberation from communitan rule.
So China is bouncing back from a very low suppressed point to a level commensurate with its newly acquired, albeit still partial, freedom. The citizen of the Emerging world need only become half as productive as the average westerner to eclipse the combined output of US and Europe not once but two times over. Do you think that current freedom levels in the Emerging World will allow its citizens to become merely half as productive as their western cohorts? I think so.
For America to hope to maintain power through military means is not only futile, but will actually hasten the decline – since military power is, in most cases a net consumer of wealth. Military power ultimately and inevitably derives from economic power. Not the other way around.
So while the even partial liberation of the Emerging World citizen is the best thing that happened to the world in the last sixty or more years — something that lifts my spirit while I watch the suicidal lemming voters of the western democracies, and something that fully compensates for the West’s suicidal travails on a worldwide basis — and while the world as a whole will, barring global conflict, continue to move towards more and more prosperity — there is no question that individual empires rise and fall.
So it is time for the US to go.
The mentality of its voters has finally converged to the world average and is thus grossly out of line with a peoples aspiring to maintain a six times world average standard of living. The tailspin correction that will bring American prosperity to a level commensurate with the new American mentality of HopNChange is coming soon.
If the western world voters do not get their act together and continue down the delusion that some others will work filling the gap between their relative productivity and the relative standard of living they continue to aspire to, they risk not only being caught up by the emerging world but actually risk having their growth being crowded out by the breakneck growth of the East.
Just think of this: With the entire west in the doldrums, the price of oil is still over $100 a barrel. The West is being crowded out.
Meanwhile western voters have sent their elected/appointed bureaucrats in Durban to try to reduce demand for energy enough so that available oil will actually stay in the ground !
It’s indicative of the West’s delusion. With three billion people in line awaiting their lifetime’s change of buying a car, western voters hope to diminish energy demand to the point where Arabs and other oil producers say: “Hey Omar, let’s stop pumping oil out of the earth. Demand has dried up! Nobody wants it anymore. We pump it out at a cost of $10-15 a barrel and it just sits there with no takers”.
Every drop of oil left behind by spineless delusional Prius driving hippies will be picked up and burned in China or somewhere, anywhere, in the thirsty developing world. And why shouldn’t it? If western useful idiots want to suicide, the three billion people who finally have something to look up to will probably not mind much.
So there’s no need to copy any model America. Simply stop rejecting the economic model that made you most prosperous nation in the first place. First realize what you’re doing right and why you’re successful. That is the first principle of any business that wants to survive.
Alas, it’s too late, the slope is now steep and lemmings seem to be irreversibly attracted to downhill.
Americans they can drop a Predator drone on without due process. Foreigners get better treated than that
http://delendam.wordpress.com
No darling the Bill would allow them to imprison foreigners without due process not Americans.
http://rideriantieconomicwarfare.blogspot.com/
Rider I
Reblogged this on The Conservative New Ager.
I don’t even know what’s going on anymore. The congress is debating a bill which would allow it to secretly imprison Americans depriving them of due process under law; an Obama ally is openly calling for communism in a WSJ op ed and the Federal Reserve of the United States is bailing out … Europe. What does one make of all of this?