China’s share of global GDP has increased from 3.6% in 2000 to 17.8% in 2019 and will continue to grow, the CEBR said. It would pass the per capita threshold of $12,536 (£9,215) to become a high-income country by 2023.

absolutely insane

    • weshallovercum [any]
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 years ago

      The neoclassical economists (neoliberals) delivered the results that China wanted

      Just wanna point out that China definitely didn't follow the neoliberal model, otherwise they would have privatized literally everything. China kept control of the commanding heights of the economy with the state.

        • Zodiark
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          deleted by creator

        • weshallovercum [any]
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 years ago

          Neoliberalism has a much more strict definition than "privatizing parts of the economy". It means privatizing the majority of the economy, inclusing the commanding heights. Also using the state to enforce private property and crush labor is not a neoliberal policy, it is a universal phenomenon. Neoliberalism upholds that private ownership and markets are always better than state ownership. China had a huge amount of state ownership of assets and state control of the commanding heights throughout its fastest growing years. The SOEs were less profitable than private enterprises, inspite of that China's economy grew rapidly. If China truly was neoliberal, it would have privatized all SOEs from the start. And if neoliberal logic was true, China's economy should have suffered due to SOEs, rather than SOEs being one of the biggest reasons for it's rapid and consistent growth.

            • weshallovercum [any]
              ·
              4 years ago

              You're not getting my point. China is much closer to Keynesianism, Scandinavian-style social democracy than neoliberalism. Neoliberalism = USA, South Africa, Peru, Hong Kong etc. Keynesianism/socdem = Norway, Finland, Denmark etc. China is closer to the second group of nations than the first. Both Keynesians and Neoliberals would argue for privatization of the economy, but the extent of privatization is different. Keynesians call for the commanding heights of the economy to be controlled by the state, which is what China does. So it is quite categorically wrong to call China neoliberal. Like just ask any actual neoliberals if they think China is a neoliberal state.