Good question! It's also my puzzle. Furemore, i suspect that much real things are covered up by China's economic growth. So, the question of China's puzzle is equivalence of what is real factor of China's growth.

100 valuable points to encourage!

the confusion with this question from the asker actually is difference between real economy and the western economics, and the confusion conception of the economics.

first, in the economics, the growth is absolutely good and only indicate by GDP, and the labourer prefer only to higher wage and good relax. but for lot of people the growth maybe bad (not only for the pollution and the environment damaged). and the laborer may like more than higher wage and relax.

second, the growth in GDP couldn't show that the real economy is good. it only tells us that the economy may still have some space for growth. and much importantly is, there are still possibility for the competitive investors to earn more money, that is why the FDI still come in.

the seccesful multinational companies are not only good at grasping good opportunity for investment, but also at transferring with their investment and leaving when there are any risks in the economy, just as a best players of chess(wei qi) who are not only good at attacking the oppositor but at cuting or leaving some useless places as well.

anyway, china is a too much big contry for any company, so many populations have to live and consume something. only its huge markets have a lot of opportunity for any competitive multintionals as long as there is stable situation.

the demacracy economy is very important for the people to make theirselves choice for works and comsuption, and transferrin from one place to other. only the people as a whole could jugde the growth is good or not, if their living standard is better with higher income in different time and different places. no economist and politician could decide for them. that's why the people living in Montana(in the northwest of USA) may be feel much better than those living in New York, even though they get much lower salaries.

这么好的主题不应该沉下去。

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-6-25 9:58:22编辑过]

解释中国经济增长的代表性的文献有：林毅夫等（1994，1999）；但是他们的解释受到了张曙光等的批评

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-6-25 10:05:14编辑过]

I thought you did make a couple of points in your statement. Unfortunately, I have to say that they are only tangentially touched on the question and didn't resolved my puzzle in a very satisfactory fashion.

The first point you made (corret me, if I am wrong) is an issue concerning measurement. I agree that GDP ，GDP per capita or most other economic measures are not perfect (in the sense of one-to-one mapping) reflection of the "economic development" in a more general sense. However, they do represent or at least indicate certain tendencies in the real world. Any discipline of science need emprical exams which are ultimately (more or less) relied on certain proximation of the real world. In the literature of development, there did exist some research works which use satisfaction and happiness as their dependent variables instead of GDP. However, such subjective measurements are also problematic if we assume them as perfect representation of real world. Your point is that using other measurements, we will see that chinese economy is much worse, so the puzzle I raised may not exist at all. That could be one possible answer. However, it is not a soical-scientificly contructive way to answer a question.

Second, you argue that foreign investors could withdraw their investment in any situation as they wish. However, that is hard to be true in real world (an argument you used just now). Think aobut nationalization and the possible conflict across Taiwan Strait! Given that "hot money" accounts only for a small portion of overall invesment in China. Your argument could be even more unreliable.

I just came back from Beijing to the horrible city you just referred to. Ho Ho, NY is really cool (both in terms of culture and weather). By the way, RenDa looks really nice (both the new buidlings and PPMMs). I like it very much. So, let me again make a sentence about the issue of measurement. What will you use as the indicator for the educational quality of Ren Da? This great bbs forum or Mr. Brother FuRong (lotus?)? Sure, that is your own choice. But most people like me will use the first one just like social scientists who use GDP to measure economic development.

Thanks for all of you who are patient enough to finish reading my redundency.

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-7-4 10:05:09编辑过]