Is China the new idol for emerging economies?

[senheiser]

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

China's economic model is designed specifically for China, for our specific stage of economic development. And we are constantly reforming it, with massive financial reforms already announced, and to be implemented over the next few years.

Simply taking China's system and putting it in another country is not going to work, same as any other system, see the "Democratic Republic of the Congo" for example. Each country has to figure out their own system, for their own unique position in the world economy, and for their own current stage of development.

 

[Sanchez]

The starter of so called "processing industry" model was Japan in 1950s - 60s. The really old Europeans at 70s+ still remember that Japan was "copycat" and Japanese products were cheap craps. Asian "four small dragons" (Taiwan, Hongkong, South Korea, Singapore) followed the model in 1970s. China stepped on the stage in the middle of 1980s.

In the model, the countries build infrastructures, lend out land, attract investors and provide cheap labors. The industrial production begins with basic commodities like clothes, house wares, toys, that are bottom stuff of industrial chain with the least added values to raw materials, i.e. labor intensive. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and etc came out nicely with better economy, capital accumulations as well as new tech based industrial sectors. These countries have climbed up in the product supply chain.

Chinese economy began to move away from labor centric, environmental unfriendly, and low added value industries a few years ago. Based on the scale and variety of Chinese processing industries the progress to change position in the production chain would take a lot more years to accomplish, in comparison with South Korea or Taiwan.

In BRICS, B, R, S already have higher labor costs. They are not possible to become a processing industrial base as "China the Second". India would be the only possible country to follow Chinese model of development. However, I got the impression from Internet: Indians are smarter, freer and more entrepreneur capable. They are thinking of a better model...hh

For countries like Vietnam, they could follow some foot steps of processing economy and make quick advances. But within short period, they'll have to compete with China that is still on her way up.

China should not be called new idol, anyways.

 

[xunzi]

The starter of so called "processing industry" model was Japan in 1950s - 60s. The really old Europeans at 70s+ still remember that Japan was "copycat" and Japanese products were cheap craps. Asian "four small dragons" (Taiwan, Hongkong, South Korea, Singapore) followed the model in 1970s. China stepped on the stage in the middle of 1980s.

In the model, the countries build infrastructures, lend out land, attract investors and provide cheap labors. The industrial production begins with basic commodities like clothes, house wares, toys, that are bottom stuff of industrial chain with the least added values to raw materials, i.e. labor intensive. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and etc came out nicely with better economy, capital accumulations as well as new tech based industrial sectors. These countries have climbed up in the product supply chain.

Chinese economy began to move away from labor centric, environmental unfriendly, and low added value industries a few years ago. Based on the scale and variety of Chinese processing industries the progress to change position in the production chain would take a lot more years to accomplish, in comparison with South Korea or Taiwan.

In BRICS, B, R, S already have higher labor costs. They are not possible to become a processing industrial base as "China the Second". India would be the only possible country to follow Chinese model of development. However, I got the impression from Internet: Indians are smarter, freer and more entrepreneur capable. They are thinking of a better model...hh

For countries like Vietnam, they could follow some foot steps of processing economy and make quick advances. But within short period, they'll have to compete with China that is still on her way up.

China should not be called new idol, anyways.

The only similarity between us and Japan is that the initial stage of economic development gears toward export-led model. As we look deeply, we are slightly to moderately different from Japan model. We are a state capitalism that emphasized on economic priority over political reform. The state leads the way for private enterprises to follow. This is indeed new and is subject to study. We don't know whether our model will work in the long run but today it is certainly very successful and lead to admiration for many developing country.

 

[tranquilium]

Chinese model has two key components that can't really be replicated----being a country of enormous size and has a enormous educated population.

 

[TaiShang]

I think many developing countries would die to replicate what China has over the past 3-4 decades. But it requires a huge political will and sovereign domestic policy making. How free are they from encroachment by the powerful Western interests.

Their best hope is not to single-handedly pull out a second China, but to rally around China and benefit from its growth and ensure sovereignty.

 

[cirr]

Each country has genes、history、culture and present situations unique to itself，so the short answer is probably:

No.

 

[The SC]

Is China the new idol for emerging economies?

Seemingly not only for emerging economies but for well established ones as well:

Britain – China Relations On A High – Deals Worth $28 Billion Signed
Britain - China Relations On A High - Deals Worth $28 Billion Signed

 

[Nan Yang]

Path to development at least for Asian countries.
1. Strong authoritarian government
2. Infrastructure
3. Export orientated

 

[iajj]

china is no model for other emerging economies. china is an idol to them only to the extent that its example encourages them to throw off all the liberal-conservative ideologies emitting from think tanks directly controlled by angloamericans and international organizations indirectly controlled by angloamericans that served exclusively angloamerican interests and have prescribed ruinous economic and trade policies for the third world, china's rise doesn't point to a single path for success for the latter but alerts them to the possibility and the potential reward of finding their own footing in this world. other emerging powers cannot sleep on china's achievements; china's only achievement is to make angloamericans lose sleep.

 

[IsaacNewton]

In the beginning of 1980, right after Deng Xiaoping firmly got his grip of the CCP by sending the rival military fraction on vacation in Vietnam for 3 weeks. China grew non stop for almost 3 and a half decade now.

IMO, there are key structural differences between china and the rest of the developing world which made the economic miracle happen despite the disadvantages that China had.

1. A very high literacy rate for a 3rd world country - you can criticize Mao for many things, but he did a very good job at turning 10% literacy into 75%.

2. Stability - Despite all the crap western media gives to china stating how it can collapse by revolt ect, China did not face threat of civil war or had the same chronic crime rate as other developing countries.

3. Effective centralized government - Other developing countries have areas that literally have no government officials.

4. Size of the population.

Lets face it, lets say you are a rich investor in the 1980's, would you build a factory in some Africa country or China? The answer is obvious, your factory in Africa would get attacked by gangsters or run over in some civil war conflict, the population is illiterate which make inefficient workers who can't read and follow instructions, lastly there is a lack of critical infrastructure such as water/roaad/electricity, amd the government is not effective enough to build them even if you lend them the capital.

This is why china is still a much larger industrial machine than India, eventhough Chinese wages are higher.

 

[DT1010]

Another factor is ally, china had Soviet helping them to build a basic industry, same as Vietnam. but in case of africa, they don't have a strong reliable friend

 

[Edison Chen]

Another factor is ally, china had Soviet helping them to build a basic industry, same as Vietnam. but in case of africa, they don't have a strong reliable friend

China's industrialization started since 1860s, and after that USSR helped us. If China has zero foundation, USSR's help is useless.