India, China and the lesson
From Captain's Quarters blog (linked):
"Had [the Chinese government] given the people the opportunity to own their own land and control their own production, they would have never had a problem in feeding the offspring of their populace, and the Chinese would eventually have limited their own growth, just as the Western nations did during and after industrialization"
It's rather unfair to compare China in the 20th century with the US in the 19th. A better comparison is next door - India. India has had private ownership, and democracy, since its creation in 1947. China has been (more or less) communist since it became a state in 1949. In addition, both countries had been highly hierarchical class societies with high regard for children and strong religions.
So, what happened? In 1950, India had a population of 370 million, and China (excluding Taiwan) had about 563 million. 52 years later, India's population stands at 1,034 million, China's at 1.279 million. So, India grew 179% percent, while China grew "only" 127%. So apparently, giving people the land doesn't slow down growth per se...
Incidentally, in the same period, the US grew from 152 million to 288 million, or 89%. So the US population doesn't grow all that much slower than the Chinese...
(source http://www.census.gov/ipc/prod/wp02/tabA-04.pdf )
But at least private ownership of land, political empowerment and the wholesale adoptation of the anglo-saxon legal and commercial system helped grow the economy better in India than in China? Well, not really. China's GDP (in purchase parity dollars) was 240 million USD in 1950, India's was 222 million (for a much smaller population). Right now, China's GDP is around 8.8 trillion USD, while India's is at 3.7 trillion USD.
(sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)#1950 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29)
"Had they given the people the opportunity to own their own land and control their own production, they would have never had a problem in feeding the offspring of their populace" is overly simplistic - it didn't work for India. Let's also not forget that famine and revolution were staples of the western European landscape during the Industrial revolution... Ask the Irish.
Life just isn't that simple. Top-down policy making may have been the only way to break the stranglehold of traditionalist society and religion on the population.
"Had [the Chinese government] given the people the opportunity to own their own land and control their own production, they would have never had a problem in feeding the offspring of their populace, and the Chinese would eventually have limited their own growth, just as the Western nations did during and after industrialization"
It's rather unfair to compare China in the 20th century with the US in the 19th. A better comparison is next door - India. India has had private ownership, and democracy, since its creation in 1947. China has been (more or less) communist since it became a state in 1949. In addition, both countries had been highly hierarchical class societies with high regard for children and strong religions.
So, what happened? In 1950, India had a population of 370 million, and China (excluding Taiwan) had about 563 million. 52 years later, India's population stands at 1,034 million, China's at 1.279 million. So, India grew 179% percent, while China grew "only" 127%. So apparently, giving people the land doesn't slow down growth per se...
Incidentally, in the same period, the US grew from 152 million to 288 million, or 89%. So the US population doesn't grow all that much slower than the Chinese...
(source http://www.census.gov/ipc/prod/wp02/tabA-04.pdf )
But at least private ownership of land, political empowerment and the wholesale adoptation of the anglo-saxon legal and commercial system helped grow the economy better in India than in China? Well, not really. China's GDP (in purchase parity dollars) was 240 million USD in 1950, India's was 222 million (for a much smaller population). Right now, China's GDP is around 8.8 trillion USD, while India's is at 3.7 trillion USD.
(sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)#1950 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29)
"Had they given the people the opportunity to own their own land and control their own production, they would have never had a problem in feeding the offspring of their populace" is overly simplistic - it didn't work for India. Let's also not forget that famine and revolution were staples of the western European landscape during the Industrial revolution... Ask the Irish.
Life just isn't that simple. Top-down policy making may have been the only way to break the stranglehold of traditionalist society and religion on the population.
posted by Endorendil at 22:01
2 comments
