Ok guys enough of this structural,civil and architectural technology lecturing ! Face the harsh reality like men!It takes time to get things straightened and fixed up.Asians are not fools.I remember having read about the early days of auto giant Toyota the west brushed it aside saying a toy car from japan! Now visit any western country and tell me how this toy car is faring in these countries.Charles Dickens used to lament over the effects of early industrial revolution in UK.The priests burnt scientists alive for the fear they may topple them one day and toppled these scientists did after rennaissance.The decrepit old man is always envious of virile young couple! hats off to china its rise does not owe much to gold and silver plunderd in americas and africa!

MW,

I'll agree with you halfway as well.

In regards to the state government, I can understand their limititations. Another point is that with the federal stimulas package (which I do support and think worked well) is that it made the banks etc. safer investments than the state governments and hence an unintended consequence of it was that sources of debt funding for the state became harder to acquire. Hence the squeeze that has been a feature of NSW for the last few years.

I use public transport alot and to be honest I find it better in many ways to driving. However I believe it does need to be made more efficient and safer. Tourism is big in NSw, especially the Blue Mountains and alot of tourists will travel by public transport, hence we should really leave the best possible impression in this regard rather than slowely tarnishing our reputation.

Being young and thinking long term about my future, I don't want to see Australia take the easy, quick but inefficient road. I don't want a government that will just settle for managing teh situation but one that is trying to improve the situation with novel and well thought out plans ( am I asking to much). The world is developing and Australia will face increased economic competition from new countries and as a result we really need to make use of our resources efficiently if we are to maintain our position as a desirable and modern country and economy. And as I said in the last post, Australia generally has an intelligent, hard working and creative population. It would be a shame to waste our potential and just rely on resources.

The points made earlier about mature economies is very valid. The question is though, have Western countries learnt how to maintain a developed economy that well? I don't think so, and again doing this is the hard part. Development can be copied, there is basically a formula, adjusted slightly and with a bit of luck that can help countries develop. Singapore copied Japan, HK and the Asian tigers copied Singapore and China realised in the 70s they had to catch up. Once you have caught up, that is the challange. Using Germany as an example; manufactoring of products until too much competition from East Asia lead Germany to focus on high-end products which has been successful. The Question is: East- Asia has in parts (Korea and others) and will in other parts (China) catch up with the technology gap. What then for the German economy? Wages will still be low in China so it wont be able to compete with China on mass production. Will it have to stay ahead of the technology or will the economy be adapted to take advantage of new opportunities. Maybe an increased role for national reputation and brand, like a corporation. Japan recently has tarnished its repuation and the outcomes will be interesting.

Immigration in my opinion has been an undeniable success. I hope it continues and I hope we can attract talented people to immigrate here because there are definite advantages working here. Ranging from stable institutions of power to good working conditions etc and the good reputation Australians have working overseas. Alot of immigrants have been very succesful and have added incredibly in creating a modern and global society.

In saying that it definitely shouldn't be a free for all. The problem with immigration is that it is almost impossible to determine the true intentions of immigrants. For example international students, Some want to immigrate because they see potential and opportunities in Australia, others because it is less competitive and there life will be easier and they don't really have to give much back to the country. How do we tell the difference? Another example was the call yesterday by a Muslum leader for the implementation of elements of Sharia law in Australia (although only a minor law concerning custody of children) I don't agree with this and believe we should not let people immigrate that want to live by different standards to the rest of the population. Multiculturalism works by people living together and making compromises with each other, not by creating different laws and rules for different ethnic or religious groups. That will just divide the population by these superficial differences. Immigration will be a major political issue for the next decade or more but by nature it is a very difficult issue where getting the right balance is a real challange.

": I am literally daring you to debate and discuss ancient Chinese literature--you should have the home team advantage in defending the perversion that is CCP China--yet THAT is the best you have? That's it???"

Hum, interesting offer.

These days the only Chinese literature that is interesting
and I have time for is 甲骨文.

Now you can choose the subject.

If I offer a quick summary of the current discussions for "those who came in late"

1. Asia's infrastructure appears impressive but has been built to low standards say some, others aver that standards are higher in the region than elsewhere

2. As a side point, there is an ongoing discussion about whether Chinese building standards have anything to do with the "alleged" *murder* of ^millions^ of citizens. (At this rate we will soon be on to the topic of whether the decline of the New York taxi experience has anything to do with Sarah Palin ...brrr)

3. Bubbles that form on the asset prices are lightly discussed, but just below the surface lurk as perhaps the most important issue i.e. how does Asia sustain its infrastructure build out if what is being built now isn't fully utilized

4. We all agree that Australia is down in the dumps

CA

"Am I supposed to believe that the Asians are inherently wiser?"

Not at all. Chinese history generally goes up and down in 300 year dynasty cycle. China was screwed up in one cycle, the last cycle, by the industrial revolution.

But,

"The economic history of China, one of the oldest civilizations in the world, stretches over thousands of years and has undergone alternating cycles of prosperity and decline. China was the largest economy on earth for most of the recorded history of the past two millennia."

"China was not only the largest economy for much of recorded history, but until the end of the 15th century, it also had the highest income per capita—and was the world’s technological leader.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_China_%28pre-1911%29

(1) There are those who deny the Armenian genocide--during which the Ottomans murdered 1.25 million people. (That's a very conservative number.)

(2) There are those who deny the Red Terror and Great Purge--during which the Soviets murdered 15 million people. (That's a very conservative number.)

(3) There are those who deny the Holocaust--during which National Socialism murdered 12 million people.

Now CA seems to deny the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution--during which the CCP murdered 60 million people? (That's a very conservative number by the way...)

Below: the bedrock principle China apologists and deniers are desperately trying to ignore and consistently refusing to address:

China is a pseudo-communist totalitarian state--the accomplishments of which are repugnant and vile--because they were accomplished by a pseudo-communist totalitarian state. When CCP controlled China constructs extra-amazing skyscrapers they are really constructing extra-repugnant -- extra-vile (not to mention extra-shoddily constructed) skyscrapers because they are the products of a pseudo-communist totalitarian state.

There is no ignoring, no avoiding, no denying the Virtue (Te) and The Way (Dao) of this bedrock principle.

Te and Dao are 4,000-years old ideas--priceless gifts to humanity--more profound than anything in Western thought until the Age of Reason--so why China is ignoring them now is simply beyond me.

And this is why China does not (and will never) garner Respect for any achievment (beyond lip-service) from the International Community. It has nothing to do with Racism or "the Good Old Boy" network and everything to do with abandoning these timeless-ageless principles for a pseudo-communist totalitarian state and a bunch of shoddily-constructed sky-scrapers.

Why did China fight a revolution for anyway? China finally gets rid of the landowners and warlords only to get hoodwinked by the CCP and a corrupt, defunct ideology..? It makes me so incredibly angry...as everyone can tell.

Bronc

"3. Bubbles that form on the asset prices are lightly discussed, but just below the surface lurk as perhaps the most important issue i.e. how does Asia sustain its infrastructure build out if what is being built now isn't fully utilized "

Bubble is only in a few large cities. among top 70 cities,
price was up by 3.9% in 2009. It was probably 40% for top
10 cities. There is not much under-utilization in large cities.
Investors are no dummy.

"The bubble" is actually not a bad thing. One reason for
the high price in large cities is because of this:
Most of Chinese universities are concentrated in big cities.
And the college graduates have been growing 30% annually for
last decade. And most graduates want to stay in big cities
because of higher pay and lifestyle (not my taste). And
for every new graduate, you have two parents, four
grandparents to help paying the down-payment (30% is minimum).

Now it is getting to a point that the high price is
now convincing more new graduates to find
employment in the second tier cities. (As I said before, I am investing in smaller cities now). So the high price in the big
cities is helping to balance the development.

[edit] Just found this piece:

translate.google.com/translate?js=y&...p;sl=zh-CN&tl=en

Here is an example of that "ancient cultural wisdom and leadership" that China is selling around the world. (All of that fabulous (but shoddily-constructed) architecture is bait meant to impress the weak-minded into accepting the below...

And they wonder why we're not impressed... Yeesh.

Bronc

------------------------------------------------------------------

Editor Is Fired After Criticizing Chinese Registration System
New York Times By SHARON LAFRANIERE
Published: March 9, 2010

BEIJING — A top editor of a weekly newspaper who recently called for the reform of China’s onerous household registration system, which restricts where people can live, has been forced out of his job in a fresh warning that journalists who challenge government policy too directly face retribution.

The dismissed journalist, Zhang Hong, had been deputy editor in chief of the Web site of the Economic Observer, which is based in Beijing. Two Chinese media sources reached by telephone said he was fired because of his criticism of the registration system, which ties Chinese to their parents’ hometown if they want government services.

... [Edit - Full text of copyrighted articles may not be republished.]

Full article is here:

www.nytimes.com/2010/03/10/world/asia/10china.html?ref=world

Broncazonk wrote:
(1) There are those who deny the Armenian genocide--during which the Ottomans murdered 1.25 million people. (That's a very conservative number.)

(2) There are those who deny the Red Terror and Great Purge--during which the Soviets murdered 15 million people. (That's a very conservative number.)

(3) There are those who deny the Holocaust--during which National Socialism murdered 12 million people.

Now CA seems to deny the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution--during which the CCP murdered 60 million people? (That's a very conservative number by the way...)

Below: the bedrock principle China apologists and deniers are desperately trying to ignore and consistently refusing to address:

China is a pseudo-communist totalitarian state--the accomplishments of which are repugnant and vile--because they were accomplished by a pseudo-communist totalitarian state. When CCP controlled China constructs extra-amazing skyscrapers they are really constructing extra-repugnant -- extra-vile (not to mention extra-shoddily constructed) skyscrapers because they are the products of a pseudo-communist totalitarian state.

There is no ignoring, no avoiding, no denying the Virtue (Te) and The Way (Dao) of this bedrock principle.

Te and Dao are 4,000-years old ideas--priceless gifts to humanity--more profound than anything in Western thought until the Age of Reason--so why China is ignoring them now is simply beyond me.

And this is why China does not (and will never) garner Respect for any achievment (beyond lip-service) from the International Community. It has nothing to do with Racism or "the Good Old Boy" network and everything to do with abandoning these timeless-ageless principles for a pseudo-communist totalitarian state and a bunch of shoddily-constructed sky-scrapers.

Why did China fight a revolution for anyway? China finally gets rid of the landowners and warlords only to get hoodwinked by the CCP and a corrupt, defunct ideology..? It makes me so incredibly angry...as everyone can tell.

Bronc



Bronc

Just to be clear, I did not ENTER the debate about the points you made on the Chinese Communist Party. What I found slightly distracting was the segue from Asian infrastructure to building standards and then (almost incomprehensibly) massacres and so on.

If we mean to have a 'Yin and Yang' debate about the state of modern Asia, not just China, then so be it. The way I see it:

a. Human rights are not the primary consideration in Asia, the political philosophy still revolves around the role of the citizen within the state. To that extent, using Western philosophy to evaluate Asia is a bit unfortunate.

b. Sure we can make all comparisons between the repression of people in Asia with, say African states, but there is a huge difference namely that a BILLION people have been pulled out of poverty in Asia over the past 30 years. Largely by the same governments - China - that you dislike. In any evaluation of the region, this should surely figure

c. I am not sure how your assertion of "China won't get any respect" actually meshes with reality: both the US and EU are kowtowing to China on virtually every issue, and there is no serious political party I know of in the West that has an avowed "anti-China" policy.

Indeed, I would assert the opposite of you namely that those who denigrate China (and Asia) in the West are just a bunch of old people who haven't adjusted to modern realities.

CA

Infiniti wrote:
MW,

I'll agree with you halfway as well.

In regards to the state government, I can understand their limititations. Another point is that with the federal stimulas package (which I do support and think worked well) is that it made the banks etc. safer investments than the state governments and hence an unintended consequence of it was that sources of debt funding for the state became harder to acquire. Hence the squeeze that has been a feature of NSW for the last few years.

I use public transport alot and to be honest I find it better in many ways to driving. However I believe it does need to be made more efficient and safer. Tourism is big in NSw, especially the Blue Mountains and alot of tourists will travel by public transport, hence we should really leave the best possible impression in this regard rather than slowely tarnishing our reputation.

Being young and thinking long term about my future, I don't want to see Australia take the easy, quick but inefficient road. I don't want a government that will just settle for managing teh situation but one that is trying to improve the situation with novel and well thought out plans ( am I asking to much). The world is developing and Australia will face increased economic competition from new countries and as a result we really need to make use of our resources efficiently if we are to maintain our position as a desirable and modern country and economy. And as I said in the last post, Australia generally has an intelligent, hard working and creative population. It would be a shame to waste our potential and just rely on resources.

The points made earlier about mature economies is very valid. The question is though, have Western countries learnt how to maintain a developed economy that well? I don't think so, and again doing this is the hard part. Development can be copied, there is basically a formula, adjusted slightly and with a bit of luck that can help countries develop. Singapore copied Japan, HK and the Asian tigers copied Singapore and China realised in the 70s they had to catch up. Once you have caught up, that is the challange. Using Germany as an example; manufactoring of products until too much competition from East Asia lead Germany to focus on high-end products which has been successful. The Question is: East- Asia has in parts (Korea and others) and will in other parts (China) catch up with the technology gap. What then for the German economy? Wages will still be low in China so it wont be able to compete with China on mass production. Will it have to stay ahead of the technology or will the economy be adapted to take advantage of new opportunities. Maybe an increased role for national reputation and brand, like a corporation. Japan recently has tarnished its repuation and the outcomes will be interesting.

Immigration in my opinion has been an undeniable success. I hope it continues and I hope we can attract talented people to immigrate here because there are definite advantages working here. Ranging from stable institutions of power to good working conditions etc and the good reputation Australians have working overseas. Alot of immigrants have been very succesful and have added incredibly in creating a modern and global society.

In saying that it definitely shouldn't be a free for all. The problem with immigration is that it is almost impossible to determine the true intentions of immigrants. For example international students, Some want to immigrate because they see potential and opportunities in Australia, others because it is less competitive and there life will be easier and they don't really have to give much back to the country. How do we tell the difference? Another example was the call yesterday by a Muslum leader for the implementation of elements of Sharia law in Australia (although only a minor law concerning custody of children) I don't agree with this and believe we should not let people immigrate that want to live by different standards to the rest of the population. Multiculturalism works by people living together and making compromises with each other, not by creating different laws and rules for different ethnic or religious groups. That will just divide the population by these superficial differences. Immigration will be a major political issue for the next decade or more but by nature it is a very difficult issue where getting the right balance is a real challange.


Infiniti

You and I are progressively coming closer together. In this your more recent post I found myself agreeing with up to 90% of what you said - that's real dialogue.

A few points in response:

Agree that it would probably be a good investment for the NSW state government to invest more in rail infrastructure for convenience of tourists - especially Blue Mountains run. Presently I cannot see an early revival in our overseas tourist intake for the simple reason that on the back of our minerals trade the Aust. dollar has risen in 4X value over the past two years, making a stay in Australia much more expensive for overseas visitors than used to be when our dollar was weaker. For same reason our intake of overseas students is likely to suffer. Both victims of our natural resources success.

Keenly aware that we cannot rest on our laurels and rely on chance good fortune. Agree fully with your third paragraph.

"The question is though, have Western countries learnt how to maintain a developed economy that well?" No we have not Infiniti: the likely reason being that it is an entirely new ball game and we are still on a learning curve. The emerging high-growth lands have the tactical advantage that they are following well worn paths earlier trod by others. By comparison we who are trying to manage mature economy6s are effectively in unmapped terrain - we are feeling our way along.

(Sub-essay)

The German econony? The present-day German Federal Republic emerged from the wreckage of World War Two and rebuilt itself within such a short period of time that it astounded the World at the time. To ensure domestic peace their Federal Government and private corporations entered into a pact with the unionised workforce whereby the Unions agreed to avoid confrontationjal disputation in return for workers being given a say in the governance of their workplace. I saw that myself in operation during a visit to West Germany in 1975.

I was the house guest of an employee of a travel agency and her husband in a northern town. My hostess applied for a job with a competing agency and went for her interview. I recall her returning home late afternoon almost in tears. The interview went well and she impressed management with her credentials for the job. Unfortunately, under thew rules the manager had to refer her application to a committee of employees. During her interview as part of her negotations she stated that she wanted Wednesday afternoons off to conduct private business. RFine with the manager but when put to thye workers' committee they ruled that allowing her her afternoon off would probably lower the profitability of the firm and impact badly on all of them. As she subsequently refused to back down on her claim for the afternoon off she did not get the job.

That incident was really an eye opener for me at the time. Recalling the unenviable record of confrontational trade union disputation endemic in this country at the time, it was almost unthinkable then that any given group of unionised employees could care two hoots about whether their employer was profitable or not. Especially those under the leadership of the likes of Melbourne incedinary trade unionist John Halfpenny who seemed to combine the devil-may-care recklessness of a stirrer-larrikin with a lip service to socialism. In Germany I was witnessing workplace social democracy in action.

The compact ensured an equable division of business profits between management and workforce (very necessary at the time, bearing in mind that as the frontline state of the Cold War, it served to largely immunise the West German workforce from the temptation of a shift in loyalties - the East German "socialist worker's paradise" was just a stonethrow away) and with that an equable distribution of wealth.

Regretfully what was probably an asset then has possibly turned into a liability since. Partly because of industrial social democracy, Germany now has the highest labour costs in the World bar none! Given its ageing population and workforce, hard to know where it can go from here. Ideally it needs root-and-branch reform but with an ageing constituency it is hard to see any German government now or in the forseeable future wanting to bite the bullet.

Germany's future path may be (sadly) one of slow, progressive decline.

(end of sub-essay)

Hope you make further contributions to this discussion Infiniti. I like what I see!