I wonder whether you have read Martin Hart-Landsberg's The Rush to
Development (Monthly Review, 1993). I noticed that while South Korea
is frequently described as following "export-led growth" there were
only three years in the mid-80s when there was an export surplus. I
have even seen CIA reports that claimed that China has "export-led
growth" despite the fact that their overall trade is roughly balanced.
This year they report a $9 billion deficit, after several years of
export surplus. Both South Korea and China typically have export
surpluses with the United States so perhaps we are being not only
ethnocentric but also neo-mercantilist. Why isn't "trade-led growth"
a better label for the East Asian MIracles? In my view, the more
egalitarian income distribution in South Korea and Taiwan is related
to their competition with the noncapitalist economies of North Korea
and China. Byoung-Lo Philo Kim's "Two Koreas in Development"
(Transaction) stresses this competition which spurred both countries
to imitate each other. Lynn Turgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
