Compare and Contrast the East Asian Stste Guided Economics and American Market Driven Economics
East Asian state guided economy focuses on product development for example: How to build a fuel efficient car to open market and increase profit.
American market driven economy focuses on making profits and puts less focus on product development for example: Instead of developing a fuel efficient car, the General Motor will choose to purchase a foreign car company such as Saab of Sweden in order to increase profits
Over the last two years, South Korea’s economy has recovered from the 1997 East Asian economic crisis faster than anyone expected. Indeed, Korea has become the new poster child for the “free market” economic restructuring the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is peddling to a In early 2000 the IMF touted Korea’s “dramatic turnaround” after the crisis. Not only was Korea’s output above what it had been before the crisis but, the IMF gleefully proclaimed, “over the past two years bold policies and a commitment to reform have made Korea a more open, competitive, and market driven economy.” Now, three years later, Korea faces an unbalanced recovery of questionable durability and a labor movement badly, perhaps fatally, wounded by neoliberalism, while the majority of its people suffer rising insecurity and falling incomes. If the IMF and the U.S. government succeed in their drive to transform Korea from an East Asian-style state-guided economy to a market-driven, “globalized” economy, future progressive political movements will find it exceedingly difficult to create an efficient, economic system which was designed to meet the needs of the majority of its
American market driven economy focuses on making profits and puts less focus on product development for example: Instead of developing a fuel efficient car, the General Motor will choose to purchase a foreign car company such as Saab of Sweden in order to increase profits
Over the last two years, South Korea’s economy has recovered from the 1997 East Asian economic crisis faster than anyone expected. Indeed, Korea has become the new poster child for the “free market” economic restructuring the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is peddling to a In early 2000 the IMF touted Korea’s “dramatic turnaround” after the crisis. Not only was Korea’s output above what it had been before the crisis but, the IMF gleefully proclaimed, “over the past two years bold policies and a commitment to reform have made Korea a more open, competitive, and market driven economy.” Now, three years later, Korea faces an unbalanced recovery of questionable durability and a labor movement badly, perhaps fatally, wounded by neoliberalism, while the majority of its people suffer rising insecurity and falling incomes. If the IMF and the U.S. government succeed in their drive to transform Korea from an East Asian-style state-guided economy to a market-driven, “globalized” economy, future progressive political movements will find it exceedingly difficult to create an efficient, economic system which was designed to meet the needs of the majority of its