The Great World, as Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein define it, is composed of a group of nations that make up the emerging world. In their estimation, the Great World nations are more likely to be at par economically than any other group, including rich countries like Japan, Germany, UK, the US, France, Italy, etc.
The Winner-Take-All Society
That brings us to why Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein argue in their latest book on “The Winner-Take-All Society,” “More democratic and egalitarian countries are not economically equal to other democracies.” Even though they were careful to explain that the point of their study was not to argue that democracies are better off than others, they nonetheless made the following statement:
Many Entrepreneurs And Investors
“If there is to progress in the distribution of income, it will have to come not from individual efforts but the collective efforts of many’s entrepreneurs and investors. Entrepreneurs must find an affordable way to give back to society while risking little or no return.”
Market Economy: Great World
For the record, I do believe the market should play a role in raising incomes of society, particularly in times of a big spender, which is most of the time now. However, it seems that people tend to think that a market economy will always help redistribute wealth because of its size. But then why doesn’t the “Great World” as Sunstein and Thaler refer to?
Benefits Of Economic Growth Across The Globe
Shouldn’t the rise of China and India in the last couple of decades mean that markets can spread the benefits of economic growth across the globe? Of course, it might be too optimistic to think that the markets can reduce inequalities. We need to use more smart policies, including building infrastructure, which could be its share of income. Imagine, if you invest in infrastructure in a developing country with cheap labor, what you can achieve by capitalizing on skills.
Global Competiton: Great World
The Economist argues, “China is not yet the sort of beast that may cause America to follow through on protectionism.” It believes that it will be a lot harder for China to succeed in the 21st century than it has been in the last one because of the global competition of its economy, especially with the rest of the emerging economies.
Military Equipment And Weapons
Is it possible that China is the next China? I don’t think so. It is possible that it could turn out to be the China of 2020, but that is a big if. The same Economist piece was written by Joel Naroff also stated that China is not as rich as it should be as it is a big spender on military equipment and weapons. As a result, China is also seen as unstable and poor.
Vast Amount Of Pollutions: Great World
China, we also read, also has vast amounts of pollution. Again, this is a big problem, and most economists disagree that you should support an unstable country whose economic performance is not that great.
Set On Becoming A High Power
Some believe that even though China has been a significant influence on the global economy, it is likely that it is already too late to change course as China has already done a lot of damage. They believe that China has already been reducing its environment; thus, it is already set on becoming a high power.
Environmental Protection Problems
For example, if we look at the China climate change initiative, it is a problematic statement for people who do not believe in human-made global warming. However, if we also take into account that China is a developing country and has a lot of environmental protection problems, there might be more to consider.
Is it so hard to convince the rest of the world that China is a Great World nation when it is already in full development? Think about it.