how did china build its infrastructure ?

[below_freezing]

Yes, we get it, and we agree: IQ is unchanging and important. What we do not agree on is this: IQ is the most dominant factor in social progress and everything else is not important.

"The crux of the matter is “Where money and technologies etc. external factors come from?” From Mars? No!

With time higher IQ societies develop better technologies, gather more money/finance/resources needed one way or the other, deploy better development policies (more efficient or less corrupted,) etc. Not the other way around in which technologies, money, policies and all the other goodies dropped from heaven helped certain people develop high IQ thereafter. "

- we have to examine how high IQ east asians fell behind low IQ europeans. my theory goes as such: in 18th and 19th century, East Asian population growth + inflation > GDP growth. therefore all GDP growth was put into maintanance of current living standards. The reason for this? East Asia was already running at the carrying capacity of the time for its technology. No surplus capital was avaliable for investment. Indeed, there was actually a decline in real wages during this time even if we ignore wars and colonization.

Europeans were different. They took over two whole continents and killed the inhabitants to make farmland. Previous to the discovery of the Americas, Europe was far behind east asia (and in fact, behind even India). Once they discovered the Americas, they had a situation where carrying capacity >> present population, GDP growth > population growth + inflation, surplus capital accumulated, and was able to be invested. Because of the farming capability of the Americas, Europeans imported food from the Americas which led to the unemployment of European farmers. This led to a surplus labor problem which was resolved when the surplus capital was put to use employing the surplus labor in factories. These factories turned out to be able to even further increase the GDP growth, and so on. That is how one region was able to accumlate wealth faster than another region despite having low IQs.

Now, that's the reason, I think. Why couldn't Asians replicate this model? Or for that matter, why can't Africans? Why did Middle Easterners, who were among the top in the world in 15th century, be reduced to oil sheiks in the 21st? Why can't other low IQ peoples replicate European success?

Simple: Geography for those with enough IQs, and IQs for those with the geography. Europeans got lucky with the discovery of the Americas before anyone else. That's it. Middle Easterners and Asians who have high IQs were cut off by geographical barriers (Africa and the Pacific which is much wider than the Atlantic) to discovery of unexploited resources. Africans had too low IQs and too harsh of a physical geography to even organize major states.

Once oil was discovered in the Middle East, it was already too late; industrialization had already occured, and those who were already on top could prevent those on the bottom from rising up. This is what occured in India in the 19th century when the British destroyed India's textile industry. Why did East Asia rise overall but there remain significant income differences between China/Vietnam/North Korea and South Korea/Singapore/Japan? Because of the Victory Syndrome - every country in Asia that won a war against the West is poorer than every country that lost a war against the West or a colony of the West. Reason? Because the countries that lost the wars were fortunate enough to lose during the Cold War, when the US reconstructed them as forward operating posts to block China and Russia. Countries like North Korea and Vietnam, who "won", were sanctioned and prevented access to existing technology. Why is access necessary? Because the West got to it first, and why did the West get to it first? Blind luck along with enough IQ to take advantage of it.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Good post below_freezing.

Also, I saw this documentary which said that the Industrial revolution took place in Britain first, because "coal reserves" were easily accessible on the surface.

So the fact that the Industrial revolution happened in Europe had a lot to do with luck, because they didn't need to dig deep in order to access coal reserves.

The Industrial revolution, and the colonization of the Americas, were two of the most important factors that allowed Europeans to gain such an advantage over the past 200 years.

 

[S3xy B0y]

I admire cities like Beijing,Shanghai ,Shenhehzhen.

But.
One question.
I have heard that there is a lot of difference between these few cities(5-6) and rest of China.

Please answer frankly!

 

[below_freezing]

I admire cities like Beijing,Shanghai ,Shenhehzhen.

But.
One question.
I have heard that there is a lot of difference between these few cities(5-6) and rest of China.

Please answer frankly!

I posted pictures of my hometown, Wuhan. I'll post pictures of a smaller city that I'm familiar with: Changsha, capital of Hunan Province, Central China. I go back and forth between Wuhan and Changsha numerous times a year, maybe once per month. Changsha is 1000 km inland and Hunan province (along with my province, Hubei) are net exporters of labor to the coast. A rule of thumb for discussing China's economy is: west is undeveloped, central provinces are geared towards domestic production, coast is geared towards export.

Here are the original search parameters in Baidu:

°Ù¶ÈͼƬËÑË÷_³¤É³

input: Changsha.

 

[Speeder 2]

- we have to examine how high IQ east asians fell behind low IQ europeans. .

which study tells you that? ( sorry, my bad, you can ignore this sentence - -I misread you)

my theory goes as such: in 18th and 19th century, East Asian ... No surplus capital was avaliable for investment. Indeed, there was actually a decline in real wages during this time even if we ignore wars and colonization.

in 18th and 19th century, China was largely ruled by Manchus, who even though being East Asians by race, were culturely backward and closed (compared to Han CHinese) due to their former Nomadic lifestyle.

More importantly, Imperial China had been declining ( not IQ declining) since the end of Ming Dynasty, largely due to the complacency and ignorance of the ruleing class (think: imperial laws forbidding maritime trades with outsite world, etc). This, was in direct contrast with Europe where openness, liberal thinking flourished in areas of seafaring , open world trades, new ideas, science researches, etc., that propelled Europe advance and surpass China .

Some reputed historians and/or thinkers even argue that it was mainly due to the tougher competitiveness among much smaller European states over the times than a singular unified Imperial Chinese empire with zero competition in the region...

Reasons could be multiple, but NOT due to innate IQ of the two.


Remember: IQ of different races were formed 10,000's year ago, and have remained largely stable ever since. Though East Asian IQ average is higher than Europeans', with only a small margin, not as wide as Balck-White difference. Hence a small factor such as relative geo-locations at the time could tilt the scale over one side to the other.

Europeans were different. They took over two whole continents and killed the inhabitants to make farmland.

Although I denounce the barbaric behaviours of those earlier European settlers agianst the indigenous people, the fact that they "took over two whole continents " (actually much more than that) with ease proved their higher IQ, didn't it?

A key difference here : European conquered and dominated the entire world during the colonial era, but not China, Japan and Korea, not entirely. Unlike India, or say Kenya, East Asian nations have never been conquered by European Powers entirely despite being at their weakest point in history. Europeans wanted yet couldn't . WHY? ( Think: IQ)

Previous to the discovery of the Americas, Europe was far behind east asia (and in fact, behind even India).

Disagree on India. Admittedly, India had some great achievements in her earlier history, actually, almost her pre-historical history. Yet India's achievements have never surpassed those of ancient Greece, not even in the same league. The only civilisation that was on par with, or arguablely maybe a bit more than, the acient Greece was Chinese civilisation.

India was a very rich "region" (1. not a country, but a region; 2. "rich" doesn't equate to "technolgically advanced" which is correlated with IQ) in pre-industrial times. It was mainly due to India's warm & humid climate and flat geo location with great rivers which made huge amount of arable land easily available, hence made agriculture harvests relatively much easiler than say, tougher climate regions such as Germania or Mongolia for example.

However, Britsh Industry Revolution rendered those formerly richer regions like India which largely depeneded on agriculure ( weather and gregraphy indeed) absolete!

One needs cetain high IQ level to start an Industry Revolution; one doesn't need cetain high IQ level to sustain a relatively primitive agriculture. Result: The Brits colonised the region, and formed British Raj.

Very logical, isn't it?


Why ? ( Think: IQ)

Once they discovered the Americas, they had a situation where carrying capacity >> present population, GDP growth > population growth + inflation, surplus capital accumulated, and was able to be invested. Because of the farming capability of the Americas, Europeans imported food from the Americas which led to the unemployment of European farmers. This led to a surplus labor problem which was resolved when the surplus capital was put to use employing the surplus labor in factories. These factories turned out to be able to even further increase the GDP growth, and so on.

That is how one region was able to accumlate wealth faster than another region despite having low IQs.

Why they could achieve such things in the first place?
( Think : IQ)

Your expaination is a double-edged blade: The whole process of European "accumlation of wealth and power" proves exactly that they have higher collective IQ than the indigenous folks whom they easily conquered, instead of proving that Europeans have lower IQ instead, doesn'it?

Now, that's the reason, I think. Why couldn't Asians replicate this model? Or for that matter, why can't Africans? Why did Middle Easterners, who were among the top in the world in 15th century, be reduced to oil sheiks in the 21st? Why can't other low IQ peoples replicate European success?

No , they can't, as historical (empirical) evindeces suggest otherwise.

The problem is to Africa, it has never happned as such in history. ( note: North Africa, where anicent Egypt was located, had white Europeans at the very top of its ruling class - not PC, but many evidences suggest so. Read on DNA studies on Egyptian faros)

The only exception was Arabs, who had made relatively significant achievements historically, and conquered Portugal, Spain and South France once at about 1000 A.D. Yet one must be very careful here as Arabs of 9th century A.D. most likely was a different racial group from majority Arabs of modern day ( think: their inter-breeding with conquered black Africans)

Simple: ... Europeans got lucky with the discovery of the Americas before anyone else. That's it.

Nothing , Nothing, in nature, is "lucky".

Europeans did that because they started to catch up Imperial China technologicaly at a time, when Imperial China was crippled by Emporers' close-door policy due to complacency and ignorance.

Middle Easterners and Asians who have high IQs were cut off by geographical barriers (Africa and the Pacific which is much wider than the Atlantic) to discovery of unexploited resources. Africans had too low IQs and too harsh of a physical geography to even organize major states.

sounds "right", but again, it is a chicken-egg problem in which some people, I included , may argue that "why all low IQ people have been stuck in bad geograph?y"

Is it because that higher IQ people tend to explore better geographic locations ( by any means, civil or barbaric), in order to have a better chance of survival and prosper? while constained by their general capabilities, lower IQ people tend not to so or generally failed to achieve so in a competitive environment, thus have ended up in worse geographic location , and so on ??? -

- just a thought. For every reason one could think of to help boost a group's IQ, one always can turn aound and say that it is because this group has higher IQ that enables them to do such such things in the first place. Logically I tend to believe so.

Why did East Asia rise overall but there remain significant income differences between China/Vietnam/North Korea and South Korea/Singapore/Japan?Because of the Victory Syndrome - every country in Asia that won a war against the West is poorer than every country that lost a war against the West or a colony of the West. Reason? Because the countries that lost the wars were fortunate enough to lose during the Cold War, when the US reconstructed them as forward operating posts to block China and Russia. Countries like North Korea and Vietnam, who "won", were sanctioned and prevented access to existing technology. Why is access necessary? Because the West got to it first, and why did the West get to it first? Blind luck along with enough IQ to take advantage of it.

While I agree with some of your points here, but not "blind luck", just IQ indeed when boil down to the root.

The Europeans ahve almost the same IQ as the East Asians. A small move of either two could make a lot of difference. Why Japan, South Korea are more advanced than say China? Simplely 1. size of the population ( smaller sized HK, Singapure, Taiwan are about as much advanced as Japan/Korea) 2. communism vs capatalism 3. capabilities of Cold War allances: the most advanced tech powers at the time, USA and Western Europe namely, backed Japan and Korean; while China was pretty much alone, starting from war-torn zero.


In the end, pretty much evey event/progress can be traced to IQ.

 

[justanobserver]

Ahhh the Yellow Man's burden

 

[below_freezing]

I disagree with your assessment but since it's late I won't go further into it. If you truly believe that IQ is the determining factor and hard work doesn't matter then you can do whatever you want, but for my tests I'll still study and the test doesn't care what your IQ is, it only cares about results. Next time you get a question wrong on an exam, you could consider telling your possibly non-white non-East asian instructor that because your IQ is higher than his, he should give you a higher grade. after all there's plenty of Indian professors in Western universities.

 

[CardSharp]

Ahhh the Yellow Man's burden

Not really, Whiteman's burden, is a sense of responsibility born out of a justification for imperialism and how the superior whiteman is suppose to help those being colonized.

Here we're not spreading our way of life to anyone and we're not colonizing anyone.

 

[CardSharp]

I disagree with your assessment but since it's late I won't go further into it. If you truly believe that IQ is the determining factor and hard work doesn't matter then you can do whatever you want, but for my tests I'll still study and the test doesn't care what your IQ is, it only cares about results. Next time you get a question wrong on an exam, you could consider telling your possibly non-white non-East asian instructor that because your IQ is higher than his, he should give you a higher grade. after all there's plenty of Indian professors in Western universities.

My feelings exactly.

 

[justanobserver]

Not really, Whiteman's burden, is a sense of responsibility born out of a justification for imperialism and how the superior whiteman is suppose to help those being colonized.

Here we're not spreading our way of life to anyone and we're not colonizing anyone.

I was referring to Speeder2.

So Yellow Man's apathy would be a better term? (kidding)

But his reasons behind British colonial rule (Hong Kong has the highest IQ right ?), and backwardness of Africa is just hilarious !

 

[Speeder 2]

I disagree with your assessment but since it's late I won't go further into it. If you truly believe that IQ is the determining factor and hard work doesn't matter then you can do whatever you want, but for my tests I'll still study and the test doesn't care what your IQ is, it only cares about results. Next time you get a question wrong on an exam, you could consider telling your possibly non-white non-East asian instructor that because your IQ is higher than his, he should give you a higher grade. after all there's plenty of Indian professors in Western universities.

see you don't read me again?

I've emphasised repeatedly that i disucss the entire issue on the ground of "average" / "in general", or in other words "collectively", but not on an individual basis. I don't care that there are many Indian or African professors in the US universities and so on, so good for them. That doesn't change my proposition and arguement a tiny bit.

Secondly, no troll but seriously , higher IQ groups tend to develope relatively more attractive cultures and a set of corresponding values over time. One distinguished value among all is hard-working. I won't tell you how is East Asians' general attitude towards hard work as we are world-leading on it. Yet make no mistake, one of the European protestant core values is about hard working too! So it shoudn't surprise you because ... ( think: who are the top 2 on IQ chain? ) So you just proved how right I am.


The western society's current state of being laziness , a flash of betrayal to its traditional hard working value, has nothing to do with its collective IQ , but very much to do with complacency and ignorance, the very same syndromes that brought Imperial China to her knees in the 19th century. The collapse of the ancient Greece and Rome was largely due to the same thing.

History repeats itself!

 

[Martian2]

I admire cities like Beijing,Shanghai ,Shenhehzhen.

But.
One question.
I have heard that there is a lot of difference between these few cities(5-6) and rest of China.

Please answer frankly!

Chongqing, China

Chongqing at night

Economist Intelligence Unit: Chinese Manufacturing's Real Strength Will Be Higher End Products The West Loves To Make

"Economist Intelligence Unit: Chinese Manufacturing's Real Strength Will Be Higher End Products The West Loves To Make
Vincent Fernando, CFA | Jul. 19, 2010, 5:05 AM

The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU, of The Economist magazine) believes China wage inflation fears are overdone relative to manufacturing competitiveness.

Despite massive wage inflation, China will remain a leading manufacturing economy for the next 100 years due to the economies of scale set up within the nation, the huge domestic market, plus the ability of manufacturers to move up the value chain.

The key point is that China already has more expensive labor costs than Vietnam; its real bread-and-butter of the future won't be the low-end manufacturing many people like to imagine is the heart of China's competitive advantage.

China Daily:

"A lot of people tend to think when you can just head further inland you start hitting upon these bottomless pools of surplus labor enabling you to hold costs down indefinitely. We really don't see that happening," said van Kemenade.

The analyst added that the manufacturing emerging in the major inland cities such as Chongqing did not tend to be companies seeking ever cheaper labor but often those looking to set up advanced manufacturing facilities aimed at producing goods for the China market.

"The major investment, much of it foreign, that you have seen in these inland cities has not been the type that typically follows the cheapest sources of labor. It has been fairly high value-added advanced manufacturing," he said.

They'll move into ever-higher value products, and already are."

I believe the Economist Intelligence Unit is correct in their assessment. Manufacturing plants that produce notebook computers need to move to inland cities like Chongqing. As I understand it, Shanghai has higher aspirations of becoming the financial center of China.

 

[Martian2]

I admire cities like Beijing,Shanghai ,Shenhehzhen.

But.
One question.
I have heard that there is a lot of difference between these few cities(5-6) and rest of China.

Please answer frankly!

Dalian, China

Dalian at night

Intel Dalian Chip Plant to Start Production in Q4 | TradingMarkets.com

"Intel Dalian Chip Plant to Start Production in Q4
Posted on: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 07:25:31 EDT

DALIAN, Mar 25, 2010 (SinoCast Daily Business Beat via COMTEX) --

Intel Corporation (Nasdaq: INTC | PowerRating), the world's No. One chipmaker, will put its 300-mm wafer fabrication plant in Dalian into production in the fourth quarter of 2010 as planned, said Dai Yulin, deputy mayor of Dalian, today.

The project, with a total investment of USD 6 billion, will include a USD 2.5 billion 12-inch chip production line in the first phase and USD 3.5 billion supporting facilities composed of a 12-inch chip production base, four assembling and testing plants, a R&D center, and a sales division in the second phase.

The first phase of the project is expected to bring in as much as CNY 20 billion sales revenue a year after starting operation at the beginning of 2009, according to Mr. Dai, noting that the Phase II project was scheduled to break earth in mid 2009. The chipmaker has hired more than 4,000 employees for its plant in Dalian since it entered into an agreement with the municipal government in the production base in 2007.

The Santa Clara, California-based company has a 90-nanometer chip assembling plant in Chengdu, Sichuan Province, western China.

Source: ÍøÒ× (March 25, 2010)"

300mm semiconductor wafer (Image Credit: Intel)

Intel on Track for 300mm Fab in China | Maximum PC

"Intel on Track for 300mm Fab in China
Posted 06/09/09 at 08:28:30 AM by Paul Lilly

Things are all going to plan, said Intel, who is scheduled to begin operations at its 300mm fab in Dalian, China, in 2010. Manning the fabrication plant will be the first batch of graduates from the Semiconductor Technology Institute.

According to Intel, manufacturing with 300mm wafers has a dramatic effect on the company's ability to produce semiconductors at a lower cost. In addition, 300mm manufacturing consumes 40 percent less energy and water per chip than a 200mm wafer factory, the company said.

The site in question was first announced in 2007 as a $2.5 billion project in what would ultimately become the company's first wafer fab in Asia. It was the first time since 1992 with the construction of Fab 10 in Ireland that Intel had built a fab from the ground up."

Shopping mall in Dalian, China

Retail Sales of Consumer Goods in China Will Top $2.2 Trillion in 2010 - AdAgeChina - Fast Facts

"Retail Sales of Consumer Goods Will Top $2.2 Trillion in 2010
Cars Are Now a Leading Industry in China

by Normandy Madden
Published: June 09, 2010

BEIJING (AdAgeChina.com) -- Retail sales of consumer goods in China will maintain a 20% growth rate to exceed RMB 15 trillion ($2.2 trillion) in 2010, according to the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

The academy's latest China commercial development report said automobile sales have become a leading industry. In 2009, 13.6 million cars were sold in China and the figure may surpass 15 million units in 2010.

Online shopping is another bright spot, particularly for sales of home appliances. The value of online shopping accounted for 2% of total consumer goods sales in 2009, up from 1% in 2008. That figure is expected to double again by the end of this year to reach RMB 500 billion ($73.2 billion)

Source: Asia Pulse"

 

[Martian2]

I admire cities like Beijing,Shanghai ,Shenhehzhen.

But.
One question.
I have heard that there is a lot of difference between these few cities(5-6) and rest of China.

Please answer frankly!

Xiamen, China

"Xiamen Software Park, the Silicon Valley in Haixi Zone"

China's software industry revenue up 29.1% in H1

"China's software industry revenue up 29.1% in H1
(Xinhua)
Updated: 2010-07-27 10:04

BEIJING - Revenue in China's software industry rose by 29.1 percent year on year to 604.8 billion yuan ($89.34 billion) in the first half of 2010, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) said Monday.

The speed of the growth was 6.4 percentage points higher than the same period last year, said a statement on the MIIT website.

Further, export volume of software grew by 22.7 percent to $10.33 billion in the first six months, but the speed of the growth was 6.4 percentage points lower than the average level of the industry, the statement said.

Furthermore, outsourcing services provided by the country's software industry rose by 38.8 percent to $1.23 billion, though the growth speed was 25.7 percentage points lower than the previous year.

However, experts note that the development of China's software industry remains unbalanced. The eastern regions finished 529.3 billion yuan of software business revenue, about 87.5 percent of the country's total business volume."

"Xiamen Software Park is divided into four functional areas: Information Technology Technical Support Area, ACG Area, Software R&D and IC Design Area and Administrative Area."

"The entire park caters to 40,000 employees."

Gartner says China will be World's Fastest Growing Enterprise Software Market Through 2013

"Gartner says China will be World's Fastest Growing Enterprise Software Market Through 2013

Manufacturing, Financial Services, Telecommunications and Government Remain Top Spending Sectors

Hong Kong, SAR China, March 18, 2010 —  China’s enterprise software market is forecast to maintain its strong performance, with an estimated compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 14.6 per cent from 2008 to 2013 – the highest growth rate in the world, according to Gartner, Inc. Despite current global conditions, the software market in China is expected to rebound to an annual growth rate of 14.8 per cent in 2010. Gartner analysts said that the increasing globalization of the Chinese economy is leading to a growing need for modern software with the latest features and improved functionality.
...
According to Gartner's latest forecast[1], in 2010 China will for the first time surpass US$6 billion in [enterprise] software revenue in 2010. China is the largest software market in Asia/Pacific, and the country is forecast to account for 27 per cent share of the region’s revenue in 2010, the equivalent to 2.7 per cent of the total worldwide software market share. By 2013, China’s share of the software market in Asia/Pacific is expected to reach 30 per cent, representing US$9.4 billion in revenue or 3.3 per cent of total worldwide software market revenue. Compared with mature countries in the Asia/Pacific region such as Australia (with 21 per cent share of regional spending in 2010), the software market in China is still relatively young and evolving.

The top four major vertical industries in terms of software spending are manufacturing, financial services, communications and government. Gartner estimates that in total these industries account for 60 per cent of total [enterprise] software spending in China."

 

[Martian2]

I admire cities like Beijing,Shanghai ,Shenhehzhen.

But.
One question.
I have heard that there is a lot of difference between these few cities(5-6) and rest of China.

Please answer frankly!

Urumqi, China