Well its not just the chief exec of Japan Airlines and the Jamaican PM that are in salary sacrifice mode – the Chinese government has directed executives of state-owned banks and insurers to re-think their pay packets. A government directive said that individual financial enterprises paid top execs too much and even though Chinese executives are paid at modest rates vis a vis Western standards – their pay packets are far larger than ordinary workers.
The directives are siginficant because they highlight the concerns held for the inequality between the chief executive level and the average workers. A distinction that in previous decades in communist China would not have been apparent. Afterall comrades – the fundamentals of communism is that we are all at the same level, therefore equal. Perhaps today, seeing so many McMansions in Chinese super-cities, Mao Tse Tung would be turning in his grave.
The good news for Chinese communist die-hards however is that capitalism does not necessarily need democracy. And with the growing public unhappiness over the salaries paid to senior executives, the government is still able to take some state controls and make the re-adjustments. So is the debate that capitalism doesnt need democracy to be successful and perhaps thrives better with strict parameters and regulation?
I like this image below – its a reminder of long gone days – but with a caption – Chinese communism – that has entered a new era of definition.
Great topic.
It has been proven by China and many other Asian/African/South American countries that capitalism doesn’t need democracy. China, along with former USSR and scores of other smaller communist implementations, have also proven that communism without capitalism cannot be sustained.
However, China and others are yet to prove that without Democracy, Capitalism can be sustained.
And no one, including the US, has proven that capitalism is a sustainable model in the 1st place.
Regards
Tinkerer
Thanks tinkerthethinker – you are right on all scores there – re. the final point you make about US and capitalism as a sustainable model in first place – what are your thoughts
will we just see capitalism re-bound in 2010-2011 ?
or is there a new world order about to materialise that looks different?
Its not the first time this new world order phrase has been raised of course but it seems to have come to the fore again and I wonder what type of structure/ideology will define/pervade world order in the near term if it is not capitalism ? Perhaps this is where the greens step in an say – we told you so – capitalism is not sustainable but does it matter anymore!
Hi Plutarch,
In reply to your question: I do not believe a change in the world order is imminent.
To me, the possible outcomes swing between two extremes.
The first — nothing changes. USA will muddle through its current crisis, as will the world, leaving capitalism’s image a bit tarnished, the pace of growth slower for the next decade or so, but no tectonic shift in the functioning of the US economy and hence the US society.
The second, if President Obama succeeds, will truly make the Atlantic Ocean look like a pond. Meaning, US will be a socio-capitalist model looking much more like Britain. Major changes will include universal health care, education reform and immigration reform. With special care given to ensure that capitalist virtues — like innovation, industry and growth and not truly hampered. This is a hard balance, but Obama is betting his presidency on striking it.
http://tinkerthethinkers.wordpress.com
Regards