Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Asia Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stitch who wrote (8086)	2/24/1999 4:07:00 PM
From: shadowman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

Stitch, I love ya guy, but I did not say that there is not a larger middle class in Asia now then there was two decades ago.. Things have improved, relatively. Progress has been made. And you're right, you certainly have not given my views your unqualified endorsement in the past. But your characterization of the benevolence of "exploitive" (your quote) corporations leads me to question your objectivity in that regard. I know you said it in jest, but have they gone the way of the dinosaur? They are extinct? They don't exist any longer? Let me guess, you work for a medium to large corporation? Not that it affects your objectivity, but it probably would affect mine. I'm weak that way. And yes Stitch you have a much more hands on view from your vantage point then I. I'm stateside and have been ever since I attended elementary school in Tokyo, longer ago than I'd care to admit :) The best.

To: Stitch who wrote (8086)	2/25/1999 1:50:00 AM
From: Frodo Baxter	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9980

><<I think the argument that the unreasonable exploitation of workers to benefit a few well positioned corporations or owners, such as what is happening in much of the developing world, including parts of Asia (an attempt to be on topic), to the detriment of establishing a healthy consumer (middle) class is not an intelligent blueprint for economic or political stability. This has been said before on this thread.>> You are right. It has been said before and it was wrong headed then as it still is now IMO. From my perspective, there is a much larger middle class in Asia then in any time in history. Anyone who has traveled here over the last two decades would confirm, I am sure, that Asia has had a transformation. This notion of sweat shops and exploited masses simply doesn't hold water in the greater view. That is not to say that there isn't considerably more room for continued progression towards more of the same, led in part, by "exploitative" corporations and , hopefully, more enlightened governments and fewer crooks. Ask the average worker here if he is eager to go back to the Kempong and raise rice.< Your message bears repeating again and again. The notion that the exploitation of workers is a viable means to drive productivity and production increases, in America, in Asia, or anywhere else, is a nutty populist pinko fantasy. If a country is in the midst of an economic expansion, it is incredibly difficult for the average worker to somehow not share in this prosperity. If GDP increases by 5%, the average worker is better off by... 5%. Sure, some industrialists may make off like bandits. They may even be cronies. Whatever. If GDP isn't growing, no one wins. The only caveat, as Mr. Rogers has so perceptively explained, is a futile feudalism, which of course, generates no growth, just like socialism. Capitalism, even some of the glaringly imperfect versions, does create growth. And to spread our hegemonic "imperialist" values to the world, we have to be vigorous advocates for strong world growth. Growth is what raises living standards. Growth is what creates a middle class. Growth is the instrument that forces countries to be more open, more respectful of the rule of law, more democratic, and just plain more free. So next time someone again tries that unsubstantiated contention about evil corporations not sharing the wealth, tell them this. Latent Marxism is stupid and liberal guilt does not give one a free pass to ignore economic data or rational analysis.