Increasing Living of Standards in China?

[Drace]

I had thought of China to be one of the areas stricken by massive poverty and little hope for the working class.

Though, doing some reading on several sources, it seems like China is improving.


the poverty rate in China in 1981 was 64% of the population. This rate declined to 10% in 2004, indicating that about 500 million people have climbed out of poverty during this period.


China has maintained a high growth rate for more than 25 years since the beginning of economic reform in 1978, and this sustained growth has generated a huge increase in average living standards.

We like to boast about how the USSR lifted millions out of poverty, but it seems, so did the market reforms of China?

And this information seems very contradictory to the fact the average wage in China is $0.57/hour. The poverty line of $1.25 a day is still absolutely low, but is seems progress is being made?

[RadioRaheem84]

We like to boast about how the USSR lifted millions out of poverty, but it seems, so did the market reforms of China?USSR lifted millions but left them stagnant.



And this information seems very contradictory to the fact the average wage in China is $0.57/hour. The poverty line of $1.25 a day is still absolutely low, but is seems progress is being made?Lifted millions out of stagnation to slightly higher standard, lifted thousands into immense wealth and shifted millions (out of stagnation) into poverty.

The problem has never really been capitalism, no one talks more about capitalism with such reverent awe than Marx. The point is that it's so concentrated into the hands of the few (owners). Our labor is collectivized while the profits are privatized.

State Capitalism as was China and many other "Communist" nations of the Cold War era just the nationalization of that contradiction. It left people stagnant while the bureaucrats became the new owners. Introducing market reforms just again privatized the contradiction and "lifted" whole sections of society that could benefit from new private wage labor(granted it was high enough for certain industries). For before when the state owned the workplace, the producers did not, and so they were at liberty to manage their own work but were instead subject to the state as the boss. Moreover, replacing the capitalist owning class by state officials in no way eliminates wage labor; in fact it makes it worse in many cases.

Capitalist success should be measured as such; success for the few at the expense of the many. This success for the few is then measured as a miracle.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

the poverty rate in China in 1981 was 64% of the population. This rate declined to 10% in 2004, indicating that about 500 million people have climbed out of poverty during this period.
Define "poverty." Is the definition based on money income - i.e. someone is "in poverty" if they earn less than X amount of money per month?

Then you can "lift people out of poverty" simply through inflation... (they earn more because the value of money went down)


China has maintained a high growth rate for more than 25 years since the beginning of economic reform in 1978, and this sustained growth has generated a huge increase in average living standards.
Yes, true. A huge increase in average living standards. But if you are looking at the average living standards alone, then you are ignoring all the variation between different classes and social groups. To get the real picture of what's going on, you need to look at the Gini index as well, to see if inequality is increasing or decreasing.

And the fact is that inequality has increased dramatically in China since 1978. This means that the average living standard has been pulled up by the skyrocketing wealth of the rich - while ordinary workers saw their living standards stay the same, or even decline.

Also, I bet the person you were quoting measured "living standard" in terms of GDP, which is a very faulty measurement.

[RedStarOverChina]

Yes. It is not a small achievement. However, way too much have been sacrificed. Countless workers gave their lives. The health care system is in shambles. There's just been reports that an infant infected with H1N1 virus was left in a ditch to die because the parents could not afford the medicine. :cursing:

Brazil has experience much less economic growth than China and India---yet it out-performs both in terms of hunger and poverty relief(percentage wise). It's not the so-called capitalist development that alleviates peoples living standards. It's about the level of commitment of the state.

By the way, Soviet Union experienced an economic boom after the second world war that was unparalleled in human history---not even China after the 1980s could measure up against it.

Next time you can tell supporters of "free market" economy they don't know shit until they learn about the Soviet experience.

[RadioRaheem84]

1,325,639,982 = population of China

825,000 = population of millionaires
130 = billionaires

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/10/15/china.billionaires/index.html

Lets say a million people rose, well so did people working under them in respective industries where the pay is relatively high. That number could stretch to as far as 200 million. Well the other 800+ that weren't "lifted" out of poverty live in worse conditions than before making that average wage probably in a production assembly.

[RadioRaheem84]

By the way, Soviet Union experienced an economic boom after the second world war that was unparalleled in human history---not even China after the 1980s could measure up against it.

Yeah because every other non western nation was a piece of shit third world. the thing that made the USSR a threat to the west is that to the third world it offered an alternative.

[bailey_187]

USSR lifted millions but left them stagnant..

No it didnt. In the 80s living standards had reached the highest levels very in the USSR



Our labor is collectivized while the profits are privatized.

Indeed. So the profits (or surplus) must also be collectivised.



State Capitalism as was China and many other "Communist" nations of the Cold War era just the nationalization of that contradiction. .

Well, 20th century socialism was far from "just nationalisation", but, the bringing of industry into public ownership ends the contradiction you stated above (please Rosa, if your watching dont get anti-dialectical, i dont give a fuck)



It left people stagnant while the bureaucrats became the new owners..

What do you mean by Stagnent here? How did the factory directors, state planners, party officals ever become the new owners? They could not choose when to sell the product. They could not sell on the factories. They could not leave them to their children as inheritence. Having control of output (as the panners did) does not mean you own it.
You also seem to be underestimating the power workers had in their factories in the USSR, PRC etc



Moreover, replacing the capitalist owning class by state officials in no way eliminates wage labor; in fact it makes it worse in many cases.

How so?

[bailey_187]

Yeah because every other non western nation was a piece of shit third world.

Where the fuck did u get that from? I think its more to do with that nearly every other nation did not have a planned economy...