[GMoromisato]

But even if "it was just China", it doesn't disprove the core fact that the world is getting better. China is almost 20% of the world by population, and its development has brought hundreds of millions of people out of poverty.

Plus, it might be possible for other countries to emulate China and similarly grow.

[ashivkum]

Yes, typically what this would disprove is the thesis that neoliberal economics are what have led to the decline in global poverty

[GMoromisato]

Maybe--I'm no expert.

But I'm pretty sure that neoliberal economics--particularly free trade--are what allowed China to rise so spectacularly.

[orwin]

Neoliberal economics is basically new school+Chicago school of economics, i'm not sure what it has to do with free trade. Free market, yes, which China isn't.

[Edit] China's economy is so clearly Keynesian with Marxist characteristics that I have trouble understanding why would anyone even think they're neoliberal. China is the best live example of Friedman models being worse than Keynes (not that Keynes model was perfect, at all)

[GMoromisato]

China grew because it was able to sell into Western markets. Western markets were open because neoliberal boosters believed in free trade; they believed (a) that free trade would benefit both sides, and (b) that free trade with China would encourage it to open up its economy (pushing it toward neoliberalism).

I think it's possible they turned out to be wrong on both counts. But if it had not been for neoliberals in the West pushing for free trade, China would not have developed as quickly.