送交者: 吴礼 于 2006-1-10, 13:07:29:
回答: Brad DeLong on China and growth in a review on Friedman's new book 由 mangolasi 于 2006-1-10, 06:26:27:
1. From the review, may I suggest two (albeit perhaps inconsequential) fraud in the arguments of the book.
a. Comparing economical growth and political stability of many countries does not show the causal relationship. I think it is much easier to argue that political turmoil hurts economical growth, instead of the other way around. It makes a lot more sense to compare the economical growth rate in the years prior to political unrests.
b. When studying the political landscape of the US in 1920s and 1930s, the activities of communists should have been mentioned. This factor may tip the balance and show that the American political system was also challenged, due to economical hardship.
2. I think the concept of physical limit in economical growth is very interesting. In addition, I think in the wealthiest countries, the desire of wealth is alienated.
a. To many middle-class people in the developed countries, wealth is no longer a means to satisfy the need for physical and security needs. Instead, it becomes a measure of success and power, and thus serves as a tool for self-realization. However, for the middle-class people, the only way to get more wealth (and presumably more self-realization) is to work harder (in terms of working hours and the number of people in the family who work). So the result is less freedom and security (they depend on the job to maintain their life style), and arguably less happiness.
b. Over the past century, people’s productivity has multiplied many times. However, the time we spend on working is the reduced significantly (most people still work 8 hours, many work even more). Recently I saw a report that executives and high-level professionals typically work 60 to 70 hour weeks (of course also earning a huge compensation). Other than the impact to personal life (as I said above), such “work ethics”, as reinforced by the capitalist system, also creates an oversupply of work force. As a result, the marginal return of the hours we spend on working (both to the society and to ourselves) is diminishing. But yet, we compensate by putting even more hours. In that sense, the “economical growth” that we are after also comes with a human expense, in addition to the expenses to the environment and natural resources.
c. But the above only happens in the developed countries. Most of the world population today still lives in poverty. To them, the desire for more materialist wealth is not a misguided endeavor, but a survival necessity. The world does not need more wealth, but it needs a better distribution. Actually, if there was a mechanism for the people in rich countries to give wealth to the poor while deriving self-realization in the process, the world would be much better. Of course, I know that donations are not the answer to poverty. But they are valuable help.
3. As it applies to China, economical growth certainly plays a critical role in the social and political developments.
a. During the reform and transition of China, many social-economical problems are not resolved. They just go away because of the growth. For example, in 1989 one major problem that helped to induce the turmoil was the “official merchants”: people who had access to and profited from the official distribution channels. This problem is no longer important a few years later, because the growth of the overall market size makes the “official channels” almost insignificant. Actually, however, the underlying problem grew bigger. The “official merchants” with suitcases turned into land-grabbing tycoons in the next decade. But that’s a different story.
b. Because of the fast growth, people’s expectation for tomorrow is very high. This makes them much more patent to today’s hardships and problems. This helps greatly social stability, in spite of the abundant inequality and injustice.
c. Because the resentment in the public is diluted by economic growth (or the expectation of growth), people don’t feel the need to express themselves or to get involved in the policy making processes. Therefore, they are less concerned about their rights of doing so. This is actually a dangerous situation. If the situation ever changes and people are compelled to take actions, there is no mechanism to allow their involvement. Unrest and turmoil would ensue. It would be much better to build the institution and infrastructure for a democratic political system now, when the demand is not so urgent. Unfortunately, few people would have such foresight.
d. In the long run, economical growth, especially if it is wide-spread, will lead to democracy. This is because people who are empowered by their wealth and who are stakeholders of the political process won’t be contented if they are left out of the decision making. However, this is not to day that the transition will happen progressively and peacefully. If the beneficiary of the current political system also controls the economical resources, they won’t give up their hold voluntarily. Power redistribution may have to be completed with violence. I do hope I am wrong on this point.