Maybe we're not so bad afterall?

[Gerry Clinchy]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39361557/ns/world_news-asiapacific/

We are always talking about the inequities of the capitalist system of the US, but taking another look at the situation ...


After the U.S., China has the world's most billionaires, yet incomes averaged just $3,600 last year.

Where does a communist (socialist) country come up with this many billionaires? I thought nobody was supposed to make a "profit" ... or at least have the wealth distributed more evenly than capitalism.


Experts say it's hard to justify giving aid to China when it spent an estimated $100 billion last year equipping and training the world's largest army and also holds $2.5 trillion in foreign reserves.

"China's made a strategic choice to invest in building its military and acquiring these massive reserves, but at the same time it's underfunding social services, so I think it's going to be harder and harder for donor nations to continue to fund projects in China," said Thompson.


Aid to China from individual donor countries averaged $2.6 billion a year in 2007-2008, according to the latest figures available from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Then ...

China provided around $1.4 billion in aid to Africa last year, according to Professor Deborah Brautigam, an expert on China-Africa relations at the American University in Washington, D.C.

Might as well give the $ directly to Africa & cut out the middle-man?

[YardleyLabs]

China's economic boom started after it introduced economic reforms to provide a relatively free market economy. In fact, their companies operate with fewer restrictions than are typical in many "capitalist" countries and with lower tax rates. One cost of this has been the growth in pollution and worker injuries on the job. Very few of the so called communist countries operate with Marxist economies at this point. Rather, as with China and Vietnam, Communist governments have "liberated" their economies while maintaining strict dictatorial controls over political institutions.

[Gerry Clinchy]

China's economic boom started after it introduced economic reforms to provide a relatively free market economy.

Oh ... that could mean that a capitalist system does work better than a socialistic system?

In fact, their companies operate with fewer restrictions than are typical in many "capitalist" countries and with lower tax rates.

So, lower business taxes can be a good thing for growth?

One cost of this has been the growth in pollution and worker injuries on the job. Very few of the so called communist countries operate with Marxist economies at this point.

Ah ... so that ideal of "to each according to need; from each according to their ability" doesn't work so well in the real world? Yet, that is the direction we seem to be moving toward? I.E., the govt should provide for those who can't provide for themselves; and in order to accomplish that, we should take from those who have done so?


Rather, as with China and Vietnam, Communist governments have "liberated" their economies while maintaining strict dictatorial controls over political institutions.

One might say that the latter is the worst of both worlds? Interestingly, in the article about China their system has created the same gap between "haves" and "have-nots" that we vilify in capitalism.

We also see that Cuba has now admitted that such a system just has not worked.

I think that it's important to note that such "experiments" take 50 years to unfold. Just as the UK health system has taken about 30 or 40 years to reveal that it cannot sustain itself.

A very bright friend is a member of a church that provides assistance to a local homeless shelter. His minister made a statement, that the churches had to do this because the government was failing to do their job. My friend responded, "The Bible doesn't say that the government is supposed to do this. The Bible tells us to pay our taxes, and to take care of our poor."

Over time we have come to think that government should take responsibility for just about everything in our lives. Very interesting. Years ago, I made an observation: if someone always acts irresponsibly, nobody ever expects anything different from them. If someone generally acts responsibly, those around them are stunned if they do something irresponsible. So, the more we shunt personal responsibility into the realm of government, the more we are comfortable relying on "someone else" to solve our problems.

[Franco]

Why do we still send Foreign Aid to the tune of 65 million a year to China?

Seem like with all the money we owe them that they should be sending Foreign Aid to us!

And, what about Pakistan? We just sent them another 40 million and the people of Pakistan hate everything about us yet they want to move here in droves!

I'm one pissed off Tax Payer!