The Chinese Dream (not political - just some perspectives that ought to wake us up)

[69CoronetRT]

OK, so that is your real issue.

In that post you are referring to, I found it difficult to believe that you did not understand the use of the term "income inequality" despite it being a widespread concern in the last election. Wikipedia sums it up well and reflects my understanding of the term:

Wealth inequality in the United States - Wikipedia

You suggested I was just parroting an election phrase and didn't really understand what it meant, despite that I have tried repeatedly in the past to address the issue on this site with no real input from anyone then, including you ( I guess only sound bites get real attention though, which hinders discussion). In the last election, this was a major issue and in the last line of the Wikipedia definition, it states:

A September 2014 study by Harvard Business School declared that the growing disparity between the very wealthy and the lower and middle classes is no longer sustainable.[17]

Specifically, you said: I was pointing out that while it sounds really good in a sound bite, that historically, socially, anthropology and common sense tells you "income inequality " has existed since the dawn of man and "income equality" is a ludicrous concept unless you have a totally authoritarian/slave society where all labor is on equal footing and the individual is subjugated. It is an incompatible concept with a free society.

Your view of the term "income inequality" seemed detached from the reality that exists today, and you called it a "ludicrous concept"

So you wanted to know how to address the issue since it "has existed since the dawn of man".

My honest reaction is how to I even communicate with you when you take this idealistic view of reality and feel their is no reasonable or responsible solution in a free society. Can you understand that your comment engenders disbelief? Maybe not, I don't know. But I will spend some time trying to answer your question even though I doubt it will be useful on this site or worth my time. Maybe I am wrong.

Our Democracy is dependent on the respect for the individual, and fairness to all. Is it OK with you that the wealth distribution in the country today is as lopsided as it is? It seems you believe that only survival of the fittest is the only real determinant in this world and nothing can change it. That seems overly narrow in trying to create a society that actually works on this planet.

I don't want to make this a lengthy discussion, and would offer up that the solutions mentioned in the last election involve the banking industry following the laws, our Congress not having lobbyists who pay for their campaigns that get special treatment as payback, and that taxes be proportional to income (without a lot of loopholes to escape paying them).

One of the proposed steps would be to increase the tax rates for the top incomes. You seem to suggest that this would stifle initiative, creativity and economic development in our country. But my past discussion of this included a historical overview of tax rates in the country when it was at its peak in terms of economic development after the last world war. Under President Eisenhower, when he was president from 1953 - 1961, the top tax rate was 91% and economic development was booming, and it continued to be relatively high in the Kennedy/Johnson administration and continued high even through the Nixon administration. It wasn't until the Reagan administration that his party's "trickle down" theory took hold and things began to unravel when he introduced the top tax rate of some 28%:

View attachment 150731

Bernie Sanders recommended increasing taxes for the wealthy and corporations again to stem "income inequality" and was labeled a communist or socialist, and too many dismissed his suggestions without a historical basis. Here is at least one such article that puts things into context:

Under Eisenhower, the Top Tax Rate Was 91 Percent. Was He a Socialist?

Now the Republicans and Trump want to introduce more "trickle down" with further largest tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations when our national debt is already staggering and higher education is unaffordable except for the levels above the upper middle class, our infrastructure remains untended, healthcare is a mess, etc. So how do we emulate the Chinese values of thrift, savings, emphasis on education, etc. when middle class lives paycheck to paycheck by and large and the corporations will continue to export jobs overseas and use their windfalls to pay their CEOs even more as well as their shareholders, who already are well off.

Do you really expect out society to regain our position of the world's leader when we are not acting wisely or fairly? The likely outcome of the current path we are on is to be owned fully by the Chinese. You seemed to suggest in the current thread that only by pursuing the Chinese Communist policies and actions would we be able to achieve greatness again - it was really hard to tell what you were saying, hence my questions. We were great in the past generation, so why can't we regain that again by wise democratic actions rather than Chinese communist policies? Is that what you are really suggesting? I couldn't tell and I wonder if anyone else knew what you were saying either except for MarPar I guess.

But in light of the implications of these realities, you asked a question that suggests it is inappropriate to discuss "wealth inequality" or find a solution to the reality that exists to day and call steps to improve our situation "a ludicrous concept"?

I find your suggestions very frustrating, hence my comments at the time.

But I do apologize for my other comments, as that is not my usual nature. But I really wonder how we regain our place in the world when the public is uninformed regarding history, pursuing policies that will further erode our current place and we have a president who seems incapable of delivering on what he promised in the election after almost a year in office now?

Honestly, your view of the world seems overly detached and unrealistic to me, and that is what caused me to recoil and act like others on this site, which does no one any good. That I agree with, and will refrain from similar behavior.

Peace

Frankly, you and I would have fascinating discussions around a fire with a beer. They may be totally opposite views but they would be fascinating.

You and I agree on several points but disagree on how, or if, you can change human behavior.

I appreciate and respect the well thought out response.

 

[saforwardlook]

I worked for a Chinese owned company out of NYC for 3 years. They are not committed to anything other than their own collective. They have incredible weaknesses in everything except their numbers.
I do want to ask though, and I really am being sincere, if the income equality issue needs to be addressed, and I believe it does, how does the government taxing anyone at a higher rate help fix that? Punishing an achiever by taxation can't help the poor. I understand that welfare $ get put back into circulation more quickly than someone of wealth savings accounts will. Doesn't that discourage enterprise? And please don't tell me that if we would n just elect the right people that would fix it, we never have. We all vote our personal circumstance.
I think that we as a cou try need to focus on what we agree on, not what we disagree on.

I don't feel "punishing" is the correct term. The taxation concept in the U.S. is based on progressive income tax rates. It is viewed as everyone paying their fair share. The wealthy still have plenty of motivation left after still having billions of $$ left after taxes in the highest income groups. How else could our country have achieved the status of the greatest and most powerful nation in the world in that time frame cited if there weren't still motivation left for encouraging enterprise? The point I was trying to make is that in the past tax rates were really high, so if we at least raise them to more moderate levels, we will have better and more affordable schools, better infrastructure, sufficient funds for the military and veterans, health care that is affordable for everyone and social security programs & medicare that will not be robbed in the future when those depending on it need it the most. If you really want to "Make America Great Again" we need to return to previous norms, not continue down the current path to ever greater disparity in incomes and shipping jobs overseas with no repurcussions on corporations that do so. If you would really read the articles I posted, this is all covered in them.

I agree that trying to converge on what we can agree on would help, but Congress has to be a part of that too. And that depends on who we elect to fill those seats and thereby having an informed electorate.

 

[tbm3fan]

I look at a variety of news sources to do my best to get a clear reading on what is going on in the world. This particular article on China places in perspective what we are up against in the future. Anyone that ignores them is foolish. If we can't get some real leadership in this country and come together as a society instead of fighting each other, we will soon find ourselves out in the cold - and owned by someone else...........................

The rising Chinese dream - NationofChange

Counterpoint...

Xi Jinping Faces Dilemma Over China's Growing Debt

By Richard Haass
November 2, 2017
IDEAS

On the surface, it would seem to be China’s moment. The economy continues to grow at a healthy clip, a new leadership is firmly ensconced in the aftermath of the just concluded party congress, and the country is filling some of the strategic space left vacant by a United States that is increasingly disinterested in trade pacts and global leadership.

But as is often the case, appearances can be deceiving. Economic growth has slowed (probably more than official statistics indicate), and some of the growth that exists stems from government subsidies of state-owned enterprises that would otherwise likely fail.


As a result, China’s debt is reaching dangerous levels. Efforts to generate more consumer demand and make employment less dependent on access to foreign markets is proving difficult. Much of the low-hanging fruit, including moving people from rural to urban areas, has been picked. Making things tougher is that stability has taken precedence over reform; China’s leaders want the economic benefits of an open society without the political risks. This is easier said than done.

Speaking of politics, President Xi Jinping enjoys power on a scale rivaled only by former leaders Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping. But this concentration of power has its downsides. It is not just that succession (and long-term stability) is an open question. It is also the lack of meaningful checks and balances. Any errors by Xi are likely to persist. And there is the likelihood that almost all decisions will require Xi’s personal involvement as officials fear getting crosswise with their boss. This is a recipe for paralysis.


This is highly relevant, given that Xi faces a daunting inbox. In addition to economic challenges, there is the reality of an aging society, serious air and water pollution, increased inequality and persistent corruption, despite an official campaign to stamp it out.

Chinese foreign policy also faces hurdles, beginning with North Korea. China is unwilling to use all the leverage at its disposal for fear it would destabilize the status quo. But this means risking either a war or a region in which other countries acquire nuclear weapons; the former would be an economic disaster, the latter a strategic one. Meanwhile, problems with other neighbors, wary of China’s strength, are likely to multiply.

All of which suggests Xi’s dilemma. He may be tempted to turn to a more assertive foreign policy as an alternative way to demonstrate the party’s legitimacy and right to rule. But in so doing he could jeopardize the stability that has contributed so directly to China’s economic growth. The only thing that is certain is that the future of China is much less assured than commonly assumed.


Haass is the president of the Council on Foreign Relations and author of A World in Disarray

IDEAS
TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary on events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors.
This appears in the November 13, 2017 issue of TIME.

 

[Carmine]

You notice I've sat this one out, lol.

I'll just make a couple points.

The linked article is horribly written, and here's an example of why:

87% of Chinese say their country is going in the right direction (that number is 43% for America).

Do I have to explain the issue here? Oh and for the record, if you go back to the original source for those numbers, South Africa and Ireland are far more hopeless than the US. (That's not intended as a slight on those places, just the random nature of the "satisfaction survey" methodology.)

Next, the article talks about all the wonderful "things/technology" China has as proof it's destined to rule the world. Do you remember who else used to do that?

Stalin enlisted some of Russia’s top architects to turn Moscow into a contemporary, European city. The crowning glory of this plan was to be eight skyscrapers that would rival recently completed skyscrapers in the USA and Europe.

How Russia fought the cold war with space-age washing machines

In other words, the mistake progressives, socialists, communists, "wealth equalizers" etc. always make is believing everyone measures happiness the same way they "think" Americans do... Stuff. Yet some of the most patriotic 'Merica-lovers don't have that much stuff.

Remember, unlike Soviets and Chinese, that flag isn't flying because the shack-owner fears a government goon-squad. And I bet anyone who tried to pull it down would catch a bullet.

And one last thing I'd like to mention about those glory years of the 30s, 40s and 50s when the top US tax rate was 90%, etc.... in those days, where else would a rich person park their money? In any of the rising communist states? An unstable inflationary Europe?

In 2017, you can have all the perks of being an American (or citizen of another western democracy) while parking your money in a tax shelter island. That didn't exist back then. Understand, I'm not defending this. But it is an oft-forgotten reality when comparing the 1930s-50s to 2017.

I would agree in a heartbeat that scumbag politicians have been selling out their citizens for as long as even the oldest farts on this board have been alive.

 

[saforwardlook]

You notice I've sat this one out, lol.

I'll just make a couple points.

The linked article is horribly written, and here's an example of why:

87% of Chinese say their country is going in the right direction (that number is 43% for America).

Do I have to explain the issue here? Oh and for the record, if you go back to the original source for those numbers, South Africa and Ireland are far more hopeless than the US. (That's not intended as a slight on those places, just the random nature of the "satisfaction survey" methodology.)

Next, the article talks about all the wonderful "things/technology" China has as proof it's destined to rule the world. Do you remember who else used to do that?

View attachment 150744
Stalin enlisted some of Russia’s top architects to turn Moscow into a contemporary, European city. The crowning glory of this plan was to be eight skyscrapers that would rival recently completed skyscrapers in the USA and Europe.
View attachment 150745

How Russia fought the cold war with space-age washing machines

In other words, the mistake progressives, socialists, communists, "wealth equalizers" etc. always make is believing everyone measures happiness the same way they "think" Americans do... Stuff. Yet some of the most patriotic 'Merica-lovers don't have that much stuff.

View attachment 150746

Remember, unlike Soviets and Chinese, that flag isn't flying because the shack-owner fears a government goon-squad. And I bet anyone who tried to pull it down would catch a bullet.

And one last thing I'd like to mention about those glory years of the 30s, 40s and 50s when the top US tax rate was 90%, etc.... in those days, where else would a rich person park their money? In any of the rising communist states? An unstable inflationary Europe?

In 2017, you can have all the perks of being an American (or citizen of another western democracy) while parking your money in a tax shelter island. That didn't exist back then. Understand, I'm not defending this. But it is an oft-forgotten reality when comparing the 1930s-50s to 2017.

I would agree in a heartbeat that scumbag politicians have been selling out their citizens for as long as even the oldest farts on this board have been alive.

The tax issues you cite are certainly part of the problem and it all came up when Romney released his tax returns for 2010 and 2011 as well:

Romney Made $42M in Last 2 Years

That Trump didn't release his returns at all seems to indicate the same kind of results would be shown in his case too but he was shrewd enough to deflect the predictable anger by not disclosing anything.

I agree that tax rates are only part of the story, and loopholes the other (as also mentioned in my reply to 69CoronetRT) maybe larger part. Unless an informed electorate demands candidates for the presidency and congress that will put a stop to all this crap, we will continue to get hosed. That is why Sanders was the best choice in the last election for President at least in my view. But the DNC and Fox News, to name a couple, took care of him and he didn't have the base to actually get his policies implemented either it seemed. And Trump made a lot of claims without any plans to back them up and people just bought the whole rhetoric anyway. So here we are nearly a year later and no real progress being made on any front, even for the "wall". But as you have oft said, Trump is providing the "wrench in the political process" that might help achieve real change.

And despite all the news regarding the Romney revelations many years ago now, the public still seems to be unaware/oblivious of why we are going downhill economically for the bulk of us. And guys like Paul Ryan preach to us that we just don't have the money to provide at least minimum healthcare to all and doing so would require dipping into social security, etc. to make ends meet. What a con artist. Rather, people believe that the real major problem is all the folks who want handouts. Yeah, that is part of it, but not the major one.

 

[Alchemi]

I don't want to make this a lengthy discussion.....

Fail lols

In all Seriousness - we are way too late. I sell strategy games for a living and I can tell you that a banker/production specialist when left alone will always win. The Chinese have been playing "the game of thrones" for far longer than any other country, they have had lots of practice....

 

[Carmine]

The tax issues you cite are certainly part of the problem and it all came up when Romney released his tax returns for 2010 and 2011 as well:

Romney Made $42M in Last 2 Years

That Trump didn't release his returns at all seems to indicate the same kind of results would be shown in his case too but he was shrewd enough to deflect the predictable anger by not disclosing anything.

I agree that tax rates are only part of the story, and loopholes the other (as also mentioned in my reply to 69CoronetRT) maybe larger part. Unless an informed electorate demands candidates for the presidency and congress that will put a stop to all this crap, we will continue to get hosed. That is why Sanders was the best choice in the last election for President at least in my view. But the DNC and Fox News, to name a couple, took care of him and he didn't have the base to actually get his policies implemented either it seemed. And Trump made a lot of claims without any plans to back them up and people just bought the whole rhetoric anyway. So here we are nearly a year later and no real progress being made on any front, even for the "wall". But as you have oft said, Trump is providing the "wrench in the political process" that might help achieve real change.

And despite all the news regarding the Romney revelations many years ago now, the public still seems to be unaware/oblivious of why we are going downhill economically for the bulk of us. And guys like Paul Ryan preach to us that we just don't have the money to provide at least minimum healthcare to all and doing so would require dipping into social security, etc. to make ends meet. What a con artist. Rather, people believe that the real major problem is all the folks who want handouts. Yeah, that is part of it, but not the major one.

I thought this was about the rise of the Chinese state, not tax returns? The whole argument about who paid more taxes is as dumb as (thankfully past) Mayoral races in Detroit when the argument was "who's more black?!" We all know rich people pay accountants to minimize their tax exposure.

I don't feel "punishing" is the correct term. The taxation concept in the U.S. is based on progressive income tax rates. It is viewed as everyone paying their fair share. The wealthy still have plenty of motivation left after still having billions of $$ left after taxes in the highest income groups. How else could our country have achieved the status of the greatest and most powerful nation in the world in that time frame cited if there weren't still motivation left for encouraging enterprise? The point I was trying to make is that in the past tax rates were really high, so if we at least raise them to more moderate levels, we will have better and more affordable schools, better infrastructure, sufficient funds for the military and veterans, health care that is affordable for everyone and social security programs & medicare that will not be robbed in the future when those depending on it need it the most. If you really want to "Make America Great Again" we need to return to previous norms,

This world of the past didn't have Ireland, Netherlands, Cayman Islands offering low-taxes and PO box headquarters. The world didn't run on borderless websites using email, video conferencing and drones. It was filled with people who never had government programs to prevent forclosures and hurt feelings, so employees formed unions and broke limbs of people who crossed picket lines.

In that kind of world, you can have high tax rates. Build a time masheen and make it happen. I'll buy the DeLorean.

Absent those conditions, a company just moves wherever the cost of doing business is cheapest with a reasonable expectation of due process.

 

[odcics2]

<sigh>
Still waiting for Reagan's Trickle Down Theory to get to me... =(

 

[69CoronetRT]

I agree that tax rates are only part of the story, and loopholes the other (as also mentioned in my reply to 69CoronetRT) maybe larger part. Unless an informed electorate demands candidates for the presidency and congress that will put a stop to all this crap, we will continue to get hosed. That is why Sanders was the best choice in the last election for President at least in my view. But the DNC and Fox News, to name a couple, took care of him and he didn't have the base to actually get his policies implemented either it seemed. And Trump made a lot of claims without any plans to back them up and people just bought the whole rhetoric anyway. So here we are nearly a year later and no real progress being made on any front, even for the "wall". But as you have oft said, Trump is providing the "wrench in the political process" that might help achieve real change.

Again...you and I agree on your basic premises. We've gotten what we deserve. Bread and circuses.

And yet disagree....Bernie is a neurotic nincompop playing the populist game. He's Santa Claus off season that believes in money trees. His solutions are no more feasible than what is happening now.

And....I'm not Trumper.