Business Week's criterion for most competitive economies is

[Grudge]

...silly.



At the top of the list of most competitive economies in the world is United States. Then you have economies of other European countries etc. China is nowhere to be seen on that list.



So an economy with uncompetitive failing banks and car companies is at the top (US), whereas an economy that is poised to become a world leader is uncompetitive. What these analysts fail to understand is that it is precisely because China's highly competitive economy, that it is projected to overtake the US in a couple of decades.

[Mesarthim]

*awaits sade*



I think part of it is the low cost and/or ease to enter a market. in the U.S. it is fairly easy to start a business.

[Grudge]

Nothing beats China on cost, you know that.

[Haunty]

Cost isn't the entire equation.

[Grudge]

It certainly is enough to propel China to one of the top exporting countries in the world, leading to projections by many that it will be the dominant power in the world in a decade or so.



Secondly, China hasn't suffered as much from the recession as the European economies.



Thirdly, they place a high emphasis on science and technology. This can only lead to better competitiveness.

[Abzu]

Imran, how much of China's economy is based on export?



A house is only as strong as its foundation.

[Grudge]

Undoubtedly China has suffered because of drying exports. But hey, everybody's having it rough these days.



But has China lost it's competitive edge (price-wise) to others? What are it's prospects for the future when despite the recession, there are no serious challengers to its price edge? I think the future for it is very bright.



China has handled itself quite well in the recession. They have invested heavily in infrastructure, science and education to counter this recession. They have retained state control of their key industries. They tightly regulate the economy. That is why they will emerge with the least damage from this crisis.

[bills bro]

How is communism anything to do with Chinas labour abundance?



So we are going to exaggerate a countrys success because it puts its people to work?

So if we say China has been very successful, we should also consider that it started from a base not even worth mentioning.







Also, just as a side note, I'd expect China, just as India to be more corrupt than most European nations. I don't need data to back this up, it's a safe bet. What about the joint-ventures China forces upon foreign entrepreneurs? What about the barriers to trade? This is what Business Weekly will base it's "competition" off of, you have your own definition I'm sure.

[Grudge]

[quote name="sade"]How is communism anything to do with Chinas labour abundance?[/quote]



I have not mentioned communism even once.



[quote name="sade"]So we are going to exaggerate a countrys success because it puts its people to work?

So if we say China has been very successful, we should also consider that it started from a base not even worth mentioning.[/quote]



Indeed. Highly impressive that the level of development that took Europe over two centuries to build, China has done in half a century.



[quote name="sade"]Also, just as a side note, I'd expect China, just as India to be more corrupt than most European nations. I don't need data to back this up, it's a safe bet. What about the joint-ventures China forces upon foreign entrepreneurs? What about the barriers to trade? This is what Business Weekly will base it's "competition" off of, you have your own definition I'm sure.[/quote]



Please explain what 'barriers to trade' (whether you are confusing that with barriers to entry I am not sure), has to do with 'corruption'? What do any of the points you have mentioned have to do with 'corruption'? Please explain this to me.

[Abzu]

[quote name="ManOfSteel"]Undoubtedly China has suffered because of drying exports. But hey, everybody's having it rough these days.



But has China lost it's competitive edge (price-wise) to others? What are it's prospects for the future when despite the recession, there are no serious challengers to its price edge? I think the future for it is very bright.



China has handled itself quite well in the recession. They have invested heavily in infrastructure, science and education to counter this recession. They have retained state control of their key industries. They tightly regulate the economy. That is why they will emerge with the least damage from this crisis.[/quote]



I agree with this, mostly. However, their economy is not infallible. Drying exports, poor working conditions, and increasing environmental and human rights concerns are a recipe for severe trouble ahead.

[bills bro]

[quote name="ManOfSteel"]Indeed. Highly impressive that the level of development that took Europe over two centuries to build, China has done in half a century.[/quote]



It's called convergence, catch up, etc. It's much easier to implement ideas that have already been thought of. Still impressive though.



[quote name="ManOfSteel"]Please explain what 'barriers to trade' (whether you are confusing that with barriers to entry I am not sure), has to do with 'corruption'? What do any of the points you have mentioned have to do with 'corruption'? Please explain this to me.[/quote]



Well the joint-ventures is a barrier to entry



But as far as barriers to trade I'm talking about the tariff levels, I'm sure there are others, favouritism laws, etc.



Also, I'll just say, China may export large amounts, but their domest market is pretty big too. They will not fail because demand is down for a few years...

And what are these poor working conditions? Did the industrial revolutions in Europe go through the same process?

Their CO2 emissions are not any higher than the average, probably lower in fact per person.



IRONMAN: their definition of competition is different to yours (probably related to conditions that produce monopolies = uncompetitive), that's all, just get over it. Soon I will finish my exams and I hope to start reading economics as I wish to study it.

[Grudge]

[quote name="sade"]Well the joint-ventures is a barrier to entry



But as far as barriers to trade I'm talking about the tariff levels, I'm sure there are others, favouritism laws, etc.[/quote]



You have yet to explain what this has to do with corruption. I am still waiting for that explanation.



[quote name="sade"]And what are these poor working conditions? Did the industrial revolutions in Europe go through the same process?[/quote]



Yes in fact Europe went through worse. Child labor, over 12 hours of daily hazardous work, thoroughly miserable living conditions, paltry wages, no rights to strike etc (the the official city of the chicago cubs martyrs), all these things characterized early capitalism in Europe. Not a single one of the rights was granted to workers by capitalism itself, rather,they were fought for by workers themselves, including the 8 hour working day.



Please make a detailed and thorough study of the Industrial Revolution which ushered in Capitalism and you will realize that it did not come with all of the qualities that have been gained by numerous reforms today.



[quote name="sade"]Soon I will finish my exams and I hope to start reading economics as I wish to study it.[/quote]



Good. That is a good start. The more knowledge you have the better equipped you will be to face the world.

[bills bro]

One of my lecturers is from India, and another spends a lot of time in China, I've gotten the impression from them that corruption is ripe. Especially in India but there have been comments relating to China also. That's as far as my knowledge goes.



For example, I think you've admitted you purchased your driving license? it's also common knowledge that in "lesser" developed nations the vice squad are generally more corrupt, I just think it's a safe bet, even without any proof that there is corruption is as far as businesses offering money to politicians for tax breaks.



I guess this is kind of what I mean: <!-- m -->http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption ... ions_Index<!-- m -->

China isn't that low on the list, but just from popular culture Mexico is known for being corrupt and they're pretty close together. I'm sure the United Kingdom has just fallen about 100 places with what's going on right now.



IRONMAN: That is exactly what I was saying in my comments about the industralization of Europe, it's also a major argument against limiting imports from countries that have poor working conditions and child labour. Cutting off trade with these countries will only hurt the worker, while trading with them will help improve the conditions they face over time.

[Grudge]

[quote name="sade"]One of my lecturers is from India, and another spends a lot of time in China, I've gotten the impression from them that corruption is ripe. Especially in India but there have been comments relating to China also. That's as far as my knowledge goes.



For example, I think you've admitted you purchased your driving license? it's also common knowledge that in "lesser" developed nations the vice squad are generally more corrupt, I just think it's a safe bet, even without any proof that there is corruption is as far as businesses offering money to politicians for tax breaks. [/quote]



Corruption in China does exist. Infact recently their military has come under fire for abusing the funds provided to it by the government. The CPC also acts quickly and firmly when it discovers corruption, by firing and punishing those involved. A while back some ministers were made an example of.



But that is hardly the point here. Has this corruption in China (against which the CPC ruthlessly struggles) reduced the competitive nature of the Chinese economy as a whole? Is it significant enough to have slowed China's advance? The answer is no. Infact, the Chinese economy, by virtue of its competitive edge is moving forward like an unstoppable juggernaught.





[quote name="sade"]IRONMAN: That is exactly what I was saying in my comments about the industralization of Europe, it's also a major argument against limiting imports from countries that have poor working conditions and child labour. Cutting off trade with these countries will only hurt the worker, while trading with them will help improve the conditions they face over time.[/quote]



If China can supply its domestic economy with cheap goods why should it rely on imports?



If China runs a trade surplus because of its exports, a surplus which it can invest back into the economy for the benefit of these same workers you speak of, why should it rely on imports?



In relative terms, the worker has not been hurt by the CPC's strategy. These past couple of decades have infact seen tens of millions pulled out of poverty in China. The worker has benefited.



Given a choice, the CPC's strategy is the best out of the lot, and the only one that is ensuring the burning hot growth rate of the country.

[bills bro]

Just because corruption has produced growth does not mean it's competitive.



Business Week has a different definition to you, that is all.



Go lift some weights

[Grudge]

.......

[Abzu]

[quote name="ManOfSteel"]....... [/quote]

[Grudge]

I am not satisfied with Sade's cop out responses

[Teignub]

i agree.



i dont know that much about economics so I like to hear/read debates on it for that reason. so far Ironman has been the most convincing

[User]

things are gonna get mad fucked

[Teignub]

All empires must fall

[methodrone]

[Lavabug]

[quote name="hafsteinn"][/quote]

:cock:

[Abzu]

[quote name="Teignub"]i agree.



i dont know that much about economics so I like to hear/read debates on it for that reason. so far Ironman has been the most convincing[/quote]