User talk:Cabcsam

Hey
You're simplifying it to a great degree.. Yes, while its true that the Communist Party controls several private enterprises through party committee, they don't do it always, and no, the five-year plan does not play as big a role as it use to do (indicative planning).. The state sector compromises 50 percent of the China's GNP (and then you have to add the collective sector, which is controlled by the party). So the Chinese Communist Party dominates, but it still a market economy. As they say, the state guides the market. --TIAYN (talk) 16:24, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

The fact the party does not overtly demonstrate its control of activities is not evidence of a lack of control. Rather, it is only evidence of the party’s failure to exert control. The public records contain abundant examples of economic activities bowing to the whims of the five-year plan, even by activities clearly owned and controlled by western interests. Devoid of the same records is evidence of any economic activity in defiance of the five-year plan. To state the five-year plan is not the key economic planning mechanism in a country that the state controls all the commodities and banking system, completely, is a gross simplification.

Market reforms were not the sudden inspiration of Deng Xiaoping, but rather the movement of the party to the right. There is no economic miracle only a political success. Review of the data, data not tainted by party authorship, China’s manufacturing and services sectors have decreased after an initial uptick. The percentage of farm employment has stubbornly refused to decrease. Leaving China economically at the same point, producing a third-world standard of living. Which leaves us with the question asked by common Chinese every day, if we had market reforms why are we not like Japan or South Korea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.79.173.34 (talk) 20:48, 27 December 2013 (UTC)