Order 50 Ltd.

New Chinese Future

An idea I thought of a while back is to divide China into several countries.

I keep hearing about how unsustainable a billion-plus people are run by a government like theirs in a weirdly agricultural-but-with-rapidly-rising-industrial economy can be, and I wonder: what if they were 5 (or so) separate countries with trade agreements? Would that actually work better? Or is China too monocultural for that? (Which I doubt.) All of this “growth” (which some experts claim is surpassing the US in the next few years) precludes any political uprising or civil unrest they’d have to deal with. China might have to quell several rebellions in the next 20 years. Economics without politics is fantasy. It all goes together. China will not likely surpass the US economy for a long, long time.

I think the idea that manufacturing is the determiner for economic health is going to be shattered in the next decade or so. “Oh, we build things! We win!” Uh, no. Money isn’t always made on tangibles, folks. And certainly not exclusively. How does the information industry translate into capital and wealth? We aren’t manufacturers, but remove our contribution and it all comes tumbling down. That’s why I say simply claiming manufacturing is your barometer is false. We’re in a post-industrial phase. The impact of declining manufacturing may be diminished with the increase in information technology, but it may be too soon to tell.

In other words, it’s a little more complicated than one might think.

Failing: “Socialism” or *Actual* Socialism?

In response to someone who claims that the possible dismantling of the NHS is proof that “socialism always fails”:

First, you have to define socialism. Most likely the response will be something along the lines of “no private property” or something resembling communism, both of which are incorrect. Then you have to see if the UK even practices socialism (they do not; they are a social democracy, which is significantly different), and whether the disassembling of a medical system backed by the government by Conservatives who just got into power after more than a decade is the same thing as ‘socialism failing.” Then you’d need to define “fail”: fail entirely? Leading tot eh deaths of thousands? Or simply losing popularity? Finally you have to prove that socialism, in any practical form has “failed”.

If citizens in the UK oppose the dismantling of the NHS, then socialism hasn’t failed; the Conservatives’ chances of maintaining power has.

Soccer is *socialist*? Um…

I already had this discussion recently at work. And keep in mind, I truly do love American football:

American football has a draft, trading, and a salary cap, in addition to the playoff system that includes a large chunk of the league, thereby giving more teams a shot at the title. International football, by contrast, is PURE capitalism: players go to the highest bidder, players are lent for CASH, and whoever’s on top at the end wins it all.

Which one’s socialist, then?