Talk:East Asian Tigers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
More information about this article...
East Asian Tigers is part of SGpedians' Resources
An attempt to better coordinate and organise articles related to Singapore.
To participate, simply edit this page or visit our noticeboard for more info.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the East Asian Tigers article.
Notice: Instantnood is banned from editing this article for a period of 20 March, 2007.
The user specified is on probation and has edited this article inappropriately. The user is not prevented from discussing or proposing changes on this talk page. This ban must be registered on the administrators noticeboard. If you disagree with this ban, please discuss it with the administrator who imposed it or on the noticeboard. At the end of the ban, anyone may remove this notice.

Posted by ~~~~.

Contents

"Because of the success of the initial Tigers, many nations have followed similar development models. In part, this led to the Asian Economic Crisis in the 1990s."

What? how is this true? can some explain or debunk.

Roadrunner:

While the Chinese prefer the Kuomintang to the current pro-independence President Chen, you?re way off mentioning a ?warming of relations? between the KMT and the CPC. Doesn?t KUOMINTANG President Lee Teng-hui come to mind? Warming of relations!?

Not following current events I see..... Lee Tenghui was expelled from the Kuomintang about a year ago and has been actively campaigning for DPP candidates and against KMT ones. He and his pro-independence supporters have formed their own party.

(I knew that, you slanderous liar)

It's becoming apparent that the CCP's assessment of Lee Tenghui was correct and that he was always a closet independence supporter who could not be trusted.
When former generals of the KMT and the CCP are toasting each other at a Whampoa Academy reunion, I'd say that there is a warming of relations. Neither the KMT nor the CCP sees each other as the big enemy anymore.

The revert doesn?t remove any of your other points. They?re just reorganized a bit for a better flow.

I removed Mandarin because it was ambigiuous as to whether ir was referring to the language they spoke or to their social position.

172

There actually are two different arguments in the Mainland-Taiwan comparison. One is that the Mainland would have been better off with the KMT in power. The other (and the much stronger argument) is that Taiwan's experience and for that matter the DXP experience suggests that Mao's economic policies were sub-optimal.

Reworded land reform. There were a lot of factors which made land reform on Taiwan "easy" in comparison with Latin America or the mainland. Essentially the land reformers weren't the reformed.

Roadrunner:

Do you remember Lee Teng-hui's "state to state relations"? Brink of war comes to mind.

Anyhow, I knew about those "current events". Your accusation that I?m uninformed is slander and vandalism. He was still a Kuomitang leader at the time, however.

Otherwise, it is obvious that the Mainland prefers the Kuomintang today over the pro-independence President Chen and his Democratic Progressive Party.

I?m contesting your poor word-choice. The word "warming" is too strong.

Also, the word "Mandarian" was fine. Toddlers learn to understand words in context. Toddlers learn to differentiate between homophones and homonyms. I?m sure that Wikipedia readers can do the same.

I'm sure that we both agree that China toady probably would be better off had the Dengist reforms been enacted in 1958 instead of the Great Leap (ironic though, considering Deng's role then).

You?re trying to suggest that China would have been better off it the KMT had stayed in power, right?

[edit] East Asian Tigers - More?

I'm surprised there has been no discussion about the membership of this group. Mahathir refers to Malaysia as one of the tigers [1], and other articles refer to Malaysia, Thailand and perhaps Indonesia as some of the tigers [2] [3]. I believe Yergin in "Commanding Heights" does as well. Do these other countries merit discussion here? Fuzheado 07:58, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Southeast Asian Tigers? --Jiang
Could... but the problem is many folks don't use that term much, and instead wind up using anything east of Bangladesh as the east asian tigers. Fuzheado 10:03, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I can recall reading the term tiger cubs used for Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia. This may well have been in an article in the Far Eastern Economic Review or The Economist. -- Alan Peakall 19:01, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

[edit] East Asian Tigers - More? -> Celtic Tiger

Another country that has earned a tiger badge is Ireland; Ireland has been called the "Celtic Tiger" for its high growth in the 90s, with a focus on select high-tech industries. - fueled somewhat by cheaper labor, relative to the EU.

This article should focus a bit more on what it means to be a "Tiger Economy" - there were mentions that there are several key differences in the tiger economies, but no examples were given; also, some space should be given to examine the specific traits of the tiger economies besides Taiwan.

Maybe there should also be some mention of how these economies leveraged cheap labor & education into wealth.

Another point that might be added somewhere about Tiger economies (relative to China and India) is that they are in relatively much smaller nations (easier to achieve high growth in smaller economies, but less so in larger ones like Indonesia (I'm not sure if Indonesia has ever been classified as a "Tiger").

In addition, there seems to be too much politically-motivated information here regarding China and Taiwan. A lot of that information is, imo, rather unnecesary in a discussion of "traditional" East Asian Tigers; maybe that can be moved to a "China vs. Tiger Economy" comparison page? - the information is interesting but not quite relevant

Also, I think it would be useful to mention how all of the tigers are/have run into trouble once the cost of labor reached relative equivalence with other developed nations, as a "limits" to the export-driven model and a need for a new paradigm

--Confuzion 07:58, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Comparison with India faulty

I stripped out the demographic argument about India. If you look at the top of the article, it is not part of what is common among the Tigers. The introduction is correct and demographic policy initiatives are not really considered the defining aspect of the Tigers. Furthermore, most demographers would say that population is a function of economic development, not the other way around.

I would suggest that anyone wishing to argue this should look at the pattern of global development as well. Though population planning has been carried out in numerous countries, the Tigers are the rare economic success not especially known for their population initiatives. 69.16.84.16 17:53, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] High tariff on import?

As far as I know, Hong Kong is a free-trade port, high tariff is only imposed on certain luxury goods such as automobiles and cigarettes. If this is true, would it be more appropriate to change the relevant item in the "Common characteristics of Tiger Economy" section?


[edit] Taiwan only, nothing else here

This article seems to solely focus on Taiwan, with a little on South Korea for a token, a slim one at that, of balance. Land reform is a common characteristic? Singapore and Hong Kong under land reform??? There's nothing in this article about HK or Singapore

I think this article should be renamed the Tawainese Tiger Economy, and appropriate parts excised for a new "East Asian Tigers" article. 132.205.15.43 20:04, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Views on article

It looks a lot better now with the pictures, and they are about as relevent as pictures can be for this article, so should be left that way.

In response to the section above, Taiwan is only used as a classic example of the development and growth which has taken place, from this article, people can also delve further into the stories of South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore...

One thing to ask - earlier I edited the section of the introduction which refers to Chinese spellings of the term - to me it just looked out of place, as Korean and Malay spellings are not needed - is the term 'little dragons' somehow culturally important enough to spell specifically like this? Whatever the case, ive left Huaiwei's reversion as it is.

Good work everyone. Vastu

The reason why the Chinese characters are included, is because the reference is also relatively widely used in Chinese-speaking communities, particularly for the phrase "Four little dragons", the English phrase being a literal translation of the Chinese version. The association with dragons points to its Chinese cultural underpinnings, and they are "little" in relation to the "big" dragon...China. I would personally think this is detail worth including since they refer to the same four entities.--Huaiwei 11:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for explaining :-) Vastu
No problem. ;) Do feel free to improve on it thou, as I am still writing from the "Chinese/Asian" perspective. I sometimes wonder how the non-Chinese would react to it.--Huaiwei 08:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
It is very good right now - I live in the west, and am interested in economics - from my perspective it is very informative and directs me to further information such as land reform, etc. Vastu
Oh ok glad you find it ok. ;)--Huaiwei 09:06, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge into, or move out

  • Taiwan miracle should either be merged into this article (under the "Taiwan: A Case study" section), or the contents of the section should be merged into Taiwan miracle and removed/reduced from this article--Confuzion 04:45, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Etymology

Who coined the term? When and where did the term first appeared in publication (or broadcasting or whatever)? — Instantnood 22:01, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverting spelling mistakes

I don't really care whether Traditional is listed first or second, but it is assuming bad faith, not to mention being really destructive, to be mass reverting articles so that spelling several errors are reinserted. If you undo legitimate, uncontroversial edits, such as by deliberately and recklessly inserting spelling errors, you are committing simple vandalism. I have reverted Alanmak accordingly, not out of preference for Instantnood's version in the core of the dispute, but for reinserting spelling errors.

And remember that the edit summaries are for justifying your edits, not for communicating with the other person. If the two of you want to argue it out, please do so here. --Jiang 02:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Yet the same is still happening: 01:50, April 21, 2006, 03:32, April 22, 2006. Sigh~ — Instantnood 04:18, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Alanmak's edit

Re user:Alanmak's edit summary " Revert Instant's edit - If I overdo a revert, restore the things that I have overdo WITHOUT adding your POV gabbage, so that other people don't have to waste time reverting your rubbish every time.THX " [4] - I've added nothing to the article in the last few edits which user:Alanmak keeps reverting. And.. as I recalled, two of the four participants mentioned about the infobox style style in the discussion, but I don't think user:Huaiwei was suggesting to replace the inline style with infobox style. User:Yuje was the only person to have suggested that explicitly. That's hardly a consensus as user:Alanmak has claimed [5] [6]. — Instantnood 04:18, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comparison to India

I have reduced that section to remove parts of remark that I think is non-relevant to the topic such as economic history (in the 10th century etc). But I kept the main point. Heilme 10:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Box format not needed

We should use the inline format instead of the box format because there are only three items on the list - t,s,p - so breaking it off to the side is unnecessary. Three items does not create clutter in the line, while the box is competing for the same space as the img (creating some whitespace on my browser).--Jiang 00:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

In the absence of any dissenting comments, so exists the consensus mentioned at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (China-related articles) on whether to use a box.--Jiang 03:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Industrial Harmony

Economic success in Japan, followed by the baby east Asian Tigers, has been attributed to the existence of harmonious labor-management relations. “Industrial Harmony” is this unique “Culture of harmony” that was consciously invented and developed over the last century in Japan. A semi-bureaucratic organization called the “Kyochokai” (The Co-operation and Harmony Society) was established in 1819 to meet the needs of an emerging industrial society. The “Kyochokai” took the lead in trying to define the values which would be suitable for a new japanese-style industrial society, at the time of great social troubles in industrial Europe. The resulting “invented” tradition has played an important role in the evolution and character of Japanese economic values and behavior of social peace for economic development.

Takima 22:56, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Editing dispute

Please don't use revert + comments in editing summaries to replace talking in this page, solve disputes through talking, not just revert. ([7] & [8]) Discuss the changes here. --WinHunter (talk) 04:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inappropriate focus

While East Asian Tigers is about the economic success of Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and Korea, large part of the article focuses on China and India. — HenryLi (Talk) 02:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The "four dragons" with one dragon pic missing

Is it me or did anyone else noticed that there are only 3 of the 4 "dragons" pics in the article.

here is a link to a very nice Singapore[9] skyline

WikiSnake 11:57, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/a/s/Talk%7EEast_Asian_Tigers_34e8.html"