As recently as 1981, 88 percent of the Chinese population was living in extreme poverty; today it is less than one percent. How was this possible?
Never in the history of the world have so many hundreds of millions of people risen from abject poverty to the middle class in such a short time. China’s development shows that rising economic growth – even accompanied by rising inequality – benefits the vast majority of people. Inequality in China has risen, but no one would choose to go back to the time of Mao, when the Chinese were more equal but, above all, poorer.
if you know of leadership webs that permit freedom of speech on letting yoinger half of your nation fried asians and chinese - please say - eg here's 2025's post at the IEA - for decades my father's favorite mini thinktank in UK if not the world; he used to review its annual prize recipients -
my understanding is iea was first funded/founded by the fisher family who lost a son in world war 2......my father served as teen navigating airplanes in allied bomber command stationed in burma;;; it was his hop that humans could be smart enough between 1945 and 2030 to reduce budgets spent on wars- to love next generations ;;; is that too ideal a piurpose for professions to hold?
https://iea.org.uk/explaining-chinas-economic-miracle/#comment-257270
Neither economic growth nor sustainability will be possible in any place that minimises the curiosity of the younger half of its population about how this greatest economic miracle ever was achieved and its continuing exponential impacts. Almost two thirds of people are Asian as my father normanmacrae.net lifelong stories at The Economist sought to integrate beyond the way that until world war 2 mainly white empires had engineered the world. There is a deep irony that Glasgow has staged both the first and last chance to apply engines to prevent extinction but apparently not one of the 100 most powerful english-speaking decision-makers at Glasgow aligns his reputation to mapping the basic constructs of Adam Smith. Remarkably Smith (175 years ahead of Einstein and Von Neumann) saw man-made market systems as interfacing with nature and health systems - he would fail all those who design global market sector to take over from nature's purposes. Back in 1984 , out book 2025report.com tried to offer the debating constructs needed to include every community in how global tech and local cultural morals were integrated and valued b every teacher & student. Clearly, we did an inadequate job but if there is any residual purpose of the economics profession it should do the maths on why extinction irreversibility kicks in from 2030. But do it believing 20 something graduates have the technology to do this if we make the 2020s earth races as pivotal to youth's belief in human endeavour as 1960s space race.
