Why so? What about the unity produced the 9% growth?
I don't see any reason to think that all that growth couldn't have happened sooner without all those dictators in any of those countrys.
=======================================================
Well, you are not always all that good at seeing stuff.
You think Rush tells the truth. I mean really.
Here it is: the government control of the PRC government is absolute. There are no labor disputes. The neighbors don't want pollution nextdoor or downstream, that's just too bad, but they build the factory anyway. Han Chinese run everything, minorities count for nothing. The investment money flows in from Taiwan and overseas Chinese because stability is guaranteed.
You don't get 9% growth without a recession first in any Western country. China is huge, which makes its economic success even ore impressive than that of say, Estonia.
If a country is not unified and the guarantee is not there that it will stay unified, there won't be any money invested. It will go somewhere else.
The Chinese themselves are huge savers now, and that will keep it going, despite annual fits and starts, for a good long while.
The Communists running China understand capitalism better than the leaders of any capitalist country. I imagine they learned their lessons by analyzing Hong Kong.
Capitalist countrys have had growth like that at times . And China had a huge recession that lasted decades.
The unity and communism that China underwent benefited it in the same way that smashing oneself in the head with a hammer has , it feels so good when you stop.
What can a unified China do now that it could not have done disunified?
The USA has labor disputes of every kind and always has , yet it has the strongest economy of all mankinds history right now.
I wonder if you are not reaching for something that Mao can be credited with?
If a study of HongKong is what China needed they could have done that with no Mao.
