Breaking economic principles down to a level so basic that they are meaningless.
 

Is it still Chile in here, or is it just me?

Breaking economic principles down to a level so basic that they are meaningless.
 

No, we're all just trying to digest the knowledge that Spanky -- Mr. I'm a neo-con, and we should spread democracy -- would gladly see the world's largest democracy turned into a Communist dictatorship. Because, after all, they have had really good economic growth.

Breaking economic principles down to a level so basic that they are meaningless.
 

What the hell just happened? Why are we on a new thread? Did I just get kicked off a board.

Tell me what you mean when you say "socialist." Do you mean, say, the countries of Western Europe, who have social programs that would send you into orbit with anger, or do you mean only the hard-core socialist regimes that control most of the means of production?

If it's the latter, might I observe that your straw man is getting a little tattered and old, as it's a 1970s (or so) vintage. Better to toss that one aside.

If it's the former, please explain how the countries of (say) Western Europe are destroying their respective democracies.

Breaking economic principles down to a level so basic that they are meaningless.
 

Forget it I just figured out.

BTW: I think the average citizen of China's future is looking a lot brighter than the average citizen of India.

Breaking economic principles down to a level so basic that they are meaningless.
 

When I was in Chile several years ago, I had the opportunity to attend a dinner party given by the Minister of Trade. It was at a small chateau overlooking the Mapocho River. I was on a balcony, chatting with a beautiful but somewhat faded Peruvian actress whose name I can't recall. Our conversation was interrupted by a tall distinguished gentleman who introduced himself as the Head of the Dept. of Economics at Universidad de Santiago de Chile. I asked him to what he attributed the economic miracle that was Chile. He paused, sipped his Campari, and said, "In public, I always give credit to the Wise Men from the City of Broad Shoulders. But truthfully, it was because Pinochet cleared out the underperformers."

Later that evening, I tried out my Spanish on the actress, but I must have said something wrong because she threw her drink on me and left in a huff, leaving me with not one but two cheap cocktails.

I think what you are referring to is the welfare system of those countrys. I have no problem with safety nets. When I refer to socialism I am referring to government intervention in the economy. The government manipulating markets etc. The only socialist policies they still employ in Europe are some of the countries like France (which ownes Pariba etc) own some industries and they have massive agricultural subsidies. But if you think socialism disappeared with the 70s you are sorely mistaken. Socialism is rampant throughout the third world.

Breaking economic principles down to a level so basic that they are meaningless.
 

As I said, the neo-con shows his true colors. It's not about democracy; dictatorship is fine if it claims to be pro-free market.

I guess Bush and Rice are just big ole' commies, what with their desire to see India emerge as a world power and all.

Breaking economic principles down to a level so basic that they are meaningless.
 

The only way India will emerge as a world power is if it adopts free market policies. They have about a 6% growth rate and China has over 10%. The new Prime Minister has been trying to push through reforms (like he did in the 90s) but he just can't seem to get past the special interests. You don't have to be a mathmatician to figure out that China, if things don't change, is going to leave India in the dust. Taiwan, Honk Kong, Japan, Malaysia Korea, and Singapore etc, already left India in the dust, now it is simply the PRCs turn.

Breaking economic principles down to a level so basic that they are meaningless.
 

That just sucks. I have been there a few times (not on the river but with the drinks in my face) Did you use the word Cabeza in the wrong sentence?

Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005
 

BTW: social crippalism is not a personality disorder but a permanent disability. It is really impolite of you to make fun of my being socially challenged.

Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005
 

It is the manifestation of my jealousy over all the cool places you've lived that I've never even seen.

Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005
 

Have you and mmmmmmmmm been talking?

Breaking economic principles down to a level so basic that they are meaningless.
 

How can you possibly know what China's growth rate is. They do not have a free flow of information. All of the information comes from the government. There is not a free press, is there. No. So your "data" is suspect. The data on India may be suspect too, but the chances are greater that it is more accurate than the data for China. So how can you say that. That is all I ask.

Breaking economic principles down to a level so basic that they are meaningless.
 

I'm not sure about that. From your posts today, it seems that you really believe that what India needs to do first is bring a good solid dictatorship on line, and then let the dictatorship impose free market policies (after killing a few thousand people -- or a few million, depending on whether you want to follow the Chilean or Chinese model).

On any other day I would certainly agree with you, and I would argue that if India does this the simple fact that it is a democracy will make those policies more successful, and hopefully avoid some of the structural problems that China will likely face as its economy overheats.


And yet, most of those countries managed to do so without the dictatorship and torture thing. I am not disagreeing with your economic view. I'm disagreeing with your view that this trumps everything else. I.e., that a little torture, murder, and dictatorship is just the kinda stuff ya' have to go thru.


Perhaps if I keep saying it, you will understand that "torture is bad" is not a pro-socialist, anti-free-market position.


eta: My earlier question stands. We agree that China is more affluent than India. Not a toughie, as questions go.

But would you rather see a democracy in China, or a dictatorship in India? From everything you've said today, I really think you would actually say the latter. Which is scary, and sad. (I know, Iknow.... ifyou just wait enough decades every dictatorship turns into a democracy.... right?)