What's new

China set to lift remaining 40 million people out of poverty by 2020

When the government start to interfere, it stifles innovation and competition.

There has to be a balance though, when it comes to merit and demerit goods like education and pollution where social costs/benefits don't match private costs. Or in the case of market failures like monopolies and oligopolies.

In practice, all of the major economies of the world have mixed economies.

It's all a big balancing act. The private sector wants profit maximisation, while the public sector wants more benefit to society overall, even if it is less efficient. The balance lies somewhere in between.
 
.
There has to be a balance though, when it comes to merit and demerit goods like education and pollution where social costs/benefits don't match private costs. Or in the case of market failures like monopolies and oligopolies.

In practice, all of the major economies of the world have mixed economies.

It's a balancing act.

True but on the whole, government tend to interfere too much as compare to not providing enough. I rarely hear anyone ask for more government to be in there life. And I never hear anyone say that the government is too small. And we need a bigger government.
 
.
True but on the whole, government tend to interfere too much as compare to not providing enough.

Probably true, the public sector in most countries/areas could use a lot of improvement. Trying to make the public sector more efficient/competitive via rules and regulations is a real challenge.
 
. . . .
I rarely hear anyone ask for more government to be in there life.

Lol it's the opposite in Singapore and it's unhealthy. There's something called 'Meet-The-People’s sessions' here and residents can meet their MP to ask for assistance. I heard many stories before of residents looking for their MPs for many trivial issues such as noisy neighbours, bird nest outside their flats etc. I think the government should be the last resort to solve any issue. If possible, depend on oneself or other civil organisations.
 
.
There has to be a balance though, when it comes to merit and demerit goods like education and pollution where social costs/benefits don't match private costs. Or in the case of market failures like monopolies and oligopolies.

In practice, all of the major economies of the world have mixed economies.

It's all a big balancing act. The private sector wants profit maximisation, while the public sector wants more benefit to society overall, even if it is less efficient. The balance lies somewhere in between.

Definitely agree. Development cannot be left entirely in the hands of private enterprise. First of all, critical sectors need to be remained publicly-owned/state owned. Second, even non-critical sectors needs to be supervised.

The essence of East Asia development state from Japan to Hong Kong and Taiwan (as economic regions) is state-supervised development via 5-Year Plans.

It is not an interventionist state, but it is also not a laissez faire type of state.

It is a very East Asian mode of governance. And it works well. It may not work well for others. But it has worked well for us in this region (NEA).

I think China is not to retreat from this development path.
 
.
Definitely agree. Development cannot be left entirely in the hands of private enterprise. First of all, critical sectors need to be remained publicly-owned/state owned. Second, even non-critical sectors needs to be supervised.

The essence of East Asia development state from Japan to Hong Kong and Taiwan (as economic regions) is state-supervised development via 5-Year Plans.

It is not an interventionist state, but it is also not a laissez faire type of state.

It is a very East Asian mode of governance. And it works well. It may not work well for others. But it has worked well for us in this region (NEA).

I think China is not to retreat from this development path.

HK is actually well-known for its laissez faire economy in the West. Extreme low tax, free market, economy and property dominated by private sector. Singapore on the other hand has a paternalistic government who plan the economy and which industry to attract. State capitalism with heavy government intervention in the economy.

Interesting to see two similar-sized economies and culture plays out with different economic models.
 
.
let people pursue their own happiness in their own way peacefully. people will bring themselves out of poverty in no time.
You mean iraq and afganistan after the freedom brought by USA? No! and no!
DEMO system need economic support otherwise it would be one of the worst systems.....

You mean iraq and afganistan after the freedom brought by USA? No! and no!
DEMO system need economic support otherwise it would be one of the worst systems.....
If you are rich enough then you can embrace your freedom truely,money does not mean everything but a lot and a lot how could u support ur family and educate ur children without money?!
When you are worring the next meal for your family it is hard for you to talk about demo,art,culture and freedom and self development!
 
.
You mean iraq and afganistan after the freedom brought by USA? No! and no!
DEMO system need economic support otherwise it would be one of the worst systems.....
No, the freedom of peacefully engaging civil and commercial activities among themselves without interference from government, which should solely fulfill the duty of ensuring collective defense of life, freedom and property of every resident. Iraq and Afghanistan, where there is no peace and even safety of life, have no freedom. It is a very naive thought of mistaking freedom with chaos.
 
.
China steps up war on poverty, though some are still being left behind
Reuters | Published — Monday 16 October 2017
1014581-1289110298.jpg

Migrant workers Wang Qin (left) and her sister Wang Jun eat lunch during a break from collecting scrap materials from the debris of demolished buildings on the outskirts of Beijing. (Reuters)
BEIJING: Wang Qin, 59, collects scrap at a demolished residential district on the outskirts of Beijing, working 15 hours a day and struggling on her own to pay for her granddaughter's education.
She worries that her own home, a small illegally constructed shack where she lives with her granddaughter and mentally ill husband, might also be bulldozed by local authorities.
The family lives off the 1,500 yuan ($228) a month Wang makes selling scrap and receives no assistance from the Beijing government.
As migrants from another province, they are not recognized as residents of the capital despite having lived there since 2014. Since she is not registered in Beijing, Wang has to pay more for things like school and medical care — a hardship for migrants in cities, where costs such as housing are also far higher than in the countryside.
“Every month you still need to live, I still need to pay the school fees for the child, and her food and drink every day,” said Wang, who came to Beijing to try escape the grinding poverty of her village in Henan province in central China. “I can't take it, my whole body aches, I can't earn the money.”
Wang's plight is a common one among millions of poor migrants in China's big cities, as well as in the rural areas from which so many of them come, highlighting the challenges of the government's campaign to wipe out extreme poverty by 2020.
President Xi Jinping made the campaign one of his signature policy issues after pledging in 2015 that China would lift the 70 million people living under the poverty level at the time out of poverty by 2020.
The campaign has been ratcheted up as the Communist Party prepares to hold a twice-a-decade leadership meeting on Wednesday.
“The country is placing an unprecedented amount of effort on alleviating poverty,” Liu Yongfu, head of the government's Leading Group of Poverty Alleviation and Development, said at a news conference in Beijing on Tuesday. “President Xi Jinping is personally in command, and has visited all of the areas of concentrated poverty” in China.
He added: “With the active participation of all parts of society, it can be said that the battle against poverty has achieved significant results.”
Beijing has pledged to spend 86 billion yuan on poverty alleviation this year, 30 percent more than last year, according to the Ministry of Finance. Liu said direct spending by central and local governments on poverty alleviation from 2013 to 2017 totalled 461.2 billion yuan, adding that other types of government spending also had an impact.
The funds are used for infrastructure projects, as well as subsidies for education, health care and rural agriculture.
The government's poverty line is income of 2,300 yuan per year, and by the end of 2016, 43.35 million people were still officially below it.
The president of the World Bank, Jim Yong Kim, on Thursday said China's achievement in lifting 800 million people out of poverty since 1990 was “one of the great stories in human history”.
But many researchers and social workers say the campaign doesn't address the most serious problems facing China's poor.
“I personally don't really agree with the government setting this 2020 poverty alleviation target,” said Yang Lixiong, a professor at Renmin University in Beijing who has studied the issue. “The supportive policies can relieve poverty in the short term, but from a long-term perspective, they will easily fall back into poverty.”
Central government officials acknowledge the challenges, which they say include poor implementation of policies and misuse of funds at the local level.
They also say the programme is narrowly focused in order to address the most pressing problems of the poorest rural residents, but insist that much effort is going into improving health care and education.
“First we need to win this battle, resolve the current problems,” said Liu, responding to a question from Reuters about whether the programme would continue beyond 2020.
Wu Chen, founder of the Beijing-based Social Resources Institute, which works in Dalinggou, a village in Hebei province, said development of rural areas faced challenges like the emptying of the countryside as people move to cities looking for work, environmental destruction, and lack of capital.
Dalinggou is plastered with slogans calling for the village to win the war on poverty. With that aim in mind, the local government built a new paved road to the village and last month installed solar-powered street lights.
Wu said there had been a huge improvement in rural infrastructure, but a wide information and culture gap between the rural poor and urbanites remained a major challenge.
“Can these villagers not only escape poverty in terms of income, but also information and ability poverty?”
— Reuters
COMMENTS
 
.
Lol it's the opposite in Singapore and it's unhealthy. There's something called 'Meet-The-People’s sessions' here and residents can meet their MP to ask for assistance. I heard many stories before of residents looking for their MPs for many trivial issues such as noisy neighbours, bird nest outside their flats etc. I think the government should be the last resort to solve any issue. If possible, depend on oneself or other civil organisations.

One of my favorite quote is "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country"

In terms of foreign policy, my favorite quote is

"Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none."

Definitely agree. Development cannot be left entirely in the hands of private enterprise. First of all, critical sectors need to be remained publicly-owned/state owned. Second, even non-critical sectors needs to be supervised.

The essence of East Asia development state from Japan to Hong Kong and Taiwan (as economic regions) is state-supervised development via 5-Year Plans.

It is not an interventionist state, but it is also not a laissez faire type of state.

It is a very East Asian mode of governance. And it works well. It may not work well for others. But it has worked well for us in this region (NEA).

I think China is not to retreat from this development path.

The problem is that once the government start to interfere, they will be more involved than it's necessary. The government should ensure free interprise and while ensure the environment is protected. However, protecting the environment itself should not be an industry such as carbon allowance. This will just put a price for pollution.
 
.
he problem is that once the government start to interfere, they will be more involved than it's necessary. The government should ensure free interprise and while ensure the environment is protected. However, protecting the environment itself should not be an industry such as carbon allowance. This will just put a price for pollution.

Essentially, I agree. I think, historically, East Asian developmental state is not an interfering one but a supervising and guiding one.

The government draws the outline of national development (not the least because only the government has the broadest data) and enterprises act freely within that outline. Government puts the long term vision, enterprises choose what is most practical, available and profitable.

Government still maintains control over critical sectors that are directly related to national security. It may allow public ownership but it cannot allow foreign ownership in sectors such as mining and telecommunication.

This has been the story of Taiwan's development. It was developmental government that drew the vision for Taiwan's industrialization (of course, under single-party KMT rule) and encouraged private enterprises. It was entirely government's decision/planning/regulation that made Taiwan, first, a computer kingdom, and then, a semiconductor kingdom.

If it was entirely free enterprise without government's leadership, supervision and regulation (through 5-year plans), Taiwan would not have been half where it is today
.

Similar story goes for both Korea and Japan. The amount of government/state input/regulation/protection is just incredible.
 
Last edited:
.
It's impossible to eradicate poverty 100%.

Because there's freedom, freedom to do anything you want, including freedom to take the wrong path of life.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom