and they have shut themselves to the outside world, until lately
Mao kept them in hiding for almost 50 years - because of bad capitalistic influences
2007-05-23 21:39:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by tom4bucs 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
For some reason the dictators have decided not to encourage the opening of areas beyond the coast (hong kong inspired) to capitalism. The image of an ox team driving farmer is probably still true.
They censor everybody and everything. One in 30 persons reports to "the party".
2007-05-23 22:59:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by Wonka 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
china is 4th largest economy in the world , maybe will become 3rd by this year, we are poor because we have 1.3 billion people ,if usa have 1.3 billion people , usa won't be a very rich country either
2007-05-24 01:16:25
·
answer #3
·
answered by toassassinatechairmanmao 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
The monetary exchange rate is so grossly offset that it serves 2 purposes:
1. ensures overseas jobs come to China
2. ensures Chinese citizens can not afford to defect.
Control my friend, plain and simple. They actually have 2 currencies. 1 for foreigners and 1 for the Chinese. Chinese currency is worthless outside of China.
2007-05-23 22:21:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by George 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Actually China has the 6th largest economy in the world and it's BEEN moving up the ladder my friend, with higher growth rates than everyone else on the planet.
2007-05-23 21:39:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
No! but they shouldn't be w/all the china dishes and watches they make for the U.S
2007-05-23 21:39:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
because Mao read the Neocon book and use the Bible on China
2007-05-23 22:19:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mr. USA U 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
China's poor, you say..........ever been to Cleveland?
2007-05-23 22:00:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by Jack 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
They're too busy maintaining their state of the art and world's largest army.
2007-05-23 21:40:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by Concerned 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Because under the communist system, professionals make as much as common laborers and the ones I've met consider themselves nothing more than lowly 'workers.'
2007-05-23 21:41:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋