I\’m not convinced that Ms. Hilton should be writing on matters economic

She doesn\’t really seem to have the hang of it.

Since Deng Xiaoping announced that \”to get rich is glorious\”, a minority – most of them in the Communist party – have grown very rich indeed. Millions more are better off.

Erm, hundreds of millions possibly? Maybe even more than a billion?

However, for the last decade, average household incomes have flatlined as a percentage of GDP and the wealth gap has yawned.

Err, what? GDP has been growing at 8-10% per annum. Therefore this statement is equivalent to saying that household incomes have been growing at 8-10% per annum. For certainly 20 years, perhaps 30. Meaning that those average household incomes are anywhere from 4 to 17 times larger than they were.

There is no conceivable manner in which you can call this greatest reduction in poverty ever, the greatest in the history of our entire species, \”flatlining\”. Even if we take just a decade, they\’ve doubled.

From this year, China will attempt to chart a course that will transform the economy from its current export-led, low-wage, low added-value model into a greener and more equitable mode of development.

Erm, after the development that has happened, it\’s difficult to describe China as a low wage economy any more.

It has the world\’s most rapidly ageing population, and the most developed parts of China are facing labour shortages that make wage levels uncompetitive.

As you say yourself, if wage levels are uncompetitive then it\’s not a low wage economy, is it?

Must try harder, B- Ms. Hilton.

2 thoughts on “I\’m not convinced that Ms. Hilton should be writing on matters economic”

  1. “It has the world’s most rapidly ageing population”

    Ummm, do the Chinese get older faster than the rest of us ?

    Alan Douglas

  2. A leap at the wheel

    This is the second time in a few posts today that you quote the jargon “value-added.” As an American, I don’t think think that particular flavor of double speak has infected our main stream newsrags. What do they mean?

    (obviously, they don’t just mean “value-added,” in which case any work done in exchange for a wage is probably value-added work)

    Tim adds: They really do mean “value added”. Think of two processes. One in which a series of components worth separately are worth $50 and bolted together they are worth $55. Another in which a different set of components are worth $50 but bolted together they are worth $100.

    That second “bolting together” process obviously has a higher value added than the first.

    That’s it really.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *