>--- Original Message --- >From: James Lawler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: 4/3/02 3:48:42 PM > I am curious about the statistics cited by Cliff below from Sidney's >previous message. I just read other statistics from an article posted on >another list, at <http://www.pww.org/article/view/899> >http://www.pww.org/article/view/899 Here a recent delegation of the >Communist Party USA to China was told that the "state-owned sector" in >1997 was over 75% of the economy. The impression is given that this >figure continues to be roughly valid. Was this misleading? Could the >state sector have dropped so drastically in such a short time? > >The article just posted on our list by Michel Pugliese (March 28, >"China") states "Since 1998, 25 million workers have been laid off from >state companies, Li Rongrong, the country's economy minister, said in >Beijing on March 8." I don't see how that can imply a drop from 75% to >37% of the economy. > >No doubt this has already been explained in one of our earlier very >informative messages on this topic. So excuse me if I need some >repetition. > >Best wishes, > >Jim Lawler > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Society for the Philosophical Study of Marxism Listserve >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Cliff DuRand >Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 8:38 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Markets and Marx: Whither China? > > For some time now I have been wanting to make some points in >the debate about markets and socialism as it relates to China. I >apologize to Ed that I have not found the time until now to weigh in on >his side. > I look at the percentages Sidney Gluck cites: 33% of China's >gross national product produced by small private businesses, 30% by >large joint stock companies, and 37% by state owned and collective and >village enterprises. That shows an economic system that is nearly >equally divided between the petty bourgeoisie, capitalism, and >socialism. While the socialist sector still has a slight (but declining >edge), three decades ago it was 100% of the economy. > > >
