[WalterBright]

China switched to free markets. They also had the advantage of technology that didn't exist in the 1800s.

Before China switched to free markets, they had an equal distribution of all income economy. You might want to check it out.

So, too, the USSR, Cambodia, Vietnam, Jamestown, Plymouth, etc.

[A_non_e-moose]

China and free market in the same sentence is quite a paradox.

Did you mean to say they moved from a planned economy to a market economy? A market economy yes they do have, but free? Boy oh boy that it is not. Plenty of western companies wanting to enter that market are finding that out the hard way

[WalterBright]

Nothing human is ever perfect. Markets work better the more free they are. China went for free markets, and it paid off spectacularly.

Socialism gets steadily worse the closer to "true" socialism it gets.

[nrr]

Sorry, I'm not sure I follow. What does socialism have to do with markets or the lack thereof? I always conceived of that as, like, worker cooperatives, not command economies.

[l3mure]

> Before China switched to free markets, they had an equal distribution of all income economy. You might want to check it out.

Hmmm I'm checking it out right now. Seems like life expectancy jumped massively under Mao, is that bad?

[1980phipsi]

You're cherry-picking one statistic to judge Mao's leadership.

On its own merits, life expectancy is going to be difficult to evaluate China on during this period. Mao's government followed from both a disastrous Japanese invasion as well as a disastrous civil war. Wikipedia says Mao's policies were responsible for 40 to 80 million people dying. Do the life expectancy statistics account for that? How does that compare to the performance of Western governments during the same time period?