China's increasing gap between poor and rich

[YoungJoonKim]

I was surprised to hear this.
I mean, RED CHINA?
LOL
Rich gets richer and poor gets poorer?
HEY
That's us!
But China? Communist country where rich must give up its wealth for poor?
What??!?!
I was watching this in CBC news, On the Map (something lol)
It seems from the 90s, the condition of the poor getting better rapidly reduced while rich gets REALLY richer.
it has to do with domestic economy and import/export economy, it seems. Before 90s, China was all about domestic economy (which means there was little export/import). But after 90s, export/import rapidly increased. As a result, the price of product within China increased, however, its wages not following up.
So I began to question myself, "Who is at fault?"
Big corporations of USA basically OwNs China's manufacturing power. Aren't they in charge of wages?
Aren't they doing enough to pay these people?
Last time I checked, factory works gets payed cents per creation of product or 20 cents per hour....
Are WE as consumers at fault?
Or big corporations?

So I thought of my country, South Korea's economy.
I mean, they were capitalistic country, they were much much better than China as in growth (although there were some problems during the first decade or two).

Is our corporations being mean to these Asian people?
Especially Chinese.
Is this because we won the Cold War and our economy has no goal anymore except getting richer and richer?
Or are our corporations forgetting who is the boss of the economy.

Anyways, here is one interview with a owner of rich-only-restaurant, "I think the gap between rich and poor is good thing. I mean, rich makes progress for the poor right? (basically saying poor can't make progress) Rich gives charity for the poor like school or fundings...." (this is very accurate, I assure you).
At this moment, a sudden train of thought went through my mind.
Communist = charity...
....not right

(This restaurant-for-rich is for newly rich or government officials)

 

[gluadys]

So I thought of my country, South Korea's economy.
I mean, they were capitalistic country, they were much much better than China as in growth (although there were some problems during the first decade or two).

You would do well to study the economic history of South Korea in the 1990s too. Although officially a capitalist country South Korea had a highly regulated private sector up until then. It also exercised tight import/export control and gave its own domestic corporations favorable access to the South Korean market.

Then came the "free trade" mania of the 1990s. The US and the G7 countries forced South Korea to rescind many of its regulations and dismantle most of its import/export control. The immediate result was devastating, increasing poverty in South Korea many-fold (I don't have the exact statistics to hand though I recall a report from the Presbyterian Church in South Korea of over 900 suicides in one year due to economic dislocation.) A great many domestically owned and operated enterprises went bankrupt and have since been replaced by transnational corporations, mostly under US control.

In many ways things have improved since the 1990s in South Korea and elsewhere (the Middle East and Central Asia being a huge exception because of the wars). But South Korea has never seen its economic independence restored. It is now very dependent on the global market and very vulnerable to changes in global economic conditions.

Anyways, here is one interview with a owner of rich-only-restaurant, "I think the gap between rich and poor is good thing. I mean, rich makes progress for the poor right? (basically saying poor can't make progress) Rich gives charity for the poor like school or fundings...." (this is very accurate, I assure you).

Yes, it is accurate all right. Rich capitalists love to pride themselves on their charity. But charity is not justice. God approves charity, but God also commands justice.

In my country, we call justice and charity the two feet of Christian living. To walk well you need two feet. Trying to make do with only one means you are a cripple. God does not call us to be cripples hopping along on one foot only. He says walk on two feet "Do justice and love mercy". Only on two feet can you truly "walk humbly with your God". (Micah 6:8)

It is an excess of pride and greed to suppose that we can walk well on the foot of charity alone. It is offering the poor the scraps from the table like dogs instead of giving them their rightful place at the table like children.

 

[vespasia]

Welcome to the 'free-market'

 

[YoungJoonKim]

Yes, its not about capitalism.
I think its about "free-market"
Everything seemed to go wrong for the people whereever there is "free market" where all countries economies are united.
Especially when there are no regulation.
For example,
NAFTA
North American Union

 

[vespasia]

If your intrested is it possible to find the thoughts of Adam Smith written in your own language? He wrote his theories in the C18th and it is these that underpin the behaviour of current world markets.

Adam Smith wrote his philosophy of economics and 'markets'
An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations
It is possible to view online copies in English but it can be a little tedious to read in places.

 

[mayfly]

Capitalism has brought more happiness and wealth to people than any other system. In America the rich get richer and that is good! In America the poor get richer. We have the richest poor in the world! True.

What we need are more people given a choice: work or don't eat. Replace welfare with workfare. Everybody wants to work, to support his family, to help others. Welfare short circuits that.

 

[vespasia]

Hmmm.... The UK rejected this in favour of a 'welfare state' as activists such as the Shatesbury Society and Octavia Hill amongst many others produced reports that those who have much fail to see the poor even under their own eyes.

Get 'rich' in materelistic terms does not equate to happiness. To be happy one would need to have a healthy relationship with money REGARDLESS of income.

 

[gluadys]

What we need are more people given a choice: work or don't eat. Replace welfare with workfare. Everybody wants to work, to support his family, to help others. Welfare short circuits that.

If you are going to give people that choice, you must also provide jobs. Capitalists don't want to provide jobs at American wage levels. That's why the jobs are being exported.

In America, capitalists would rather support welfare than provide jobs. It costs them less.

What we should have is free labour movement as well as free movement of capital. Then people in every country could go to where the best-paying jobs are and good paying jobs would be better distributed around the globe as businesses in all countries competed for labour just as they now compete for government grants & contracts, tax concessions and lax regulations on the environment and human rights.