The new, subtle ways the rich signal their wealth

The why has China's industrialisation happen so late?

> I said that because you claimed that investing long-term is probably the effect of being well-off.

That is the main argument here. I still think it's an effect.

Everyone knows saving for a pension is worth it, everyone knows a more expensive fridge is more economical, everyone knows expensive shoes last longer, but not everyone can afford these solutions.

> Note: I agree there are drawbacks to extreme emphasis on education. But it is a good predictor of long-term material successes of a community and a country.

The South Korean government disagrees with you.

FYI I am reading your sources. One important concept in Confucianism is this:

> Social harmony results in part from every individual knowing his or her place in the natural order, and playing his or her part well.

It's not a guide that promotes social mobility. It was created for a certain time and place.

No worries :). One thing I like about HN is professional discourse and debate, rather than the utter chaos that conversations in other fora devolve into.

> I think you're putting the cart before the horse. Yes, there's a rising demand for qualified people. But that demand didn't arise because the supply was too great. Typically when supply rises, wages drop. China is the opposite.

I agree with the fact. Honestly, I'm not sure about the underlying reasons for economic growth in China, so I will concede that I don't have much to back my assertion.

> Then why are rich people more likely to have higher education? Why do the rich in China value education just as much if not more? Why are top universities in the world not in China?

You are asking very broad questions as if they are closely related, which they are not. Rich people are free from the daily grinds of making ends meet which gives them more time to pursue some kind of education. They also have the means to afford the costs associated with getting an education, and are less likely to drop out because of monetary reasons.

Top universities in the world are not in China because of many many reasons. Some reasons are:

1. There is already a hospitable environment for academia in the US. Much like SV, its hard to replicate elsewhere.

2. English is not the medium of Instruction in many Chinese universities, making it harder to attract talent from around the world.

3. Not quite sure about this, but I'm guessing the US spends more on scientific research and engineering than China.

4. China until very recently (speaking relatively) was not a very politically stable country, and stability is very necessary for an academic community to take hold and grow strong. Most US Universities have been around at least since after the Civil War and European universities have been around for much much longer.

All of that is changing of course, but I'm pointing out the reasons why it is the way it is now.

> Also, even the poor?! Seriously?

Please don't quote me out of context. By even, my intention was that people who are trying hard to make ends meet, who don't have the basic necessities of life ... still understand that getting an education, which takes time and has no immediate alleviating benefits, can help them and is a path out of poverty. I did not intend to imply that they are somehow a lesser class of people, as you seem to imply with that statement.

I agree. I actually don't think we disagree on a lot besides pedantic disagreements outside the original discussion. That said... :)

> Top universities in the world are not in China because of many many reasons. Some reasons are:

I know the reasons, that you. Those questions were rethorical.

But please take a step back and see the discussion in context. If what nopinsight says is true, how come a society that valued education for millennia doesn't have the best universities today? Answer, nopinsight is wrong, Confucianism isn't about social mobility at all, it's the opposite, the obsession with grades and exams is relatively recent.

> Please don't quote me out of context. By even, my intention was that people who are trying hard to make ends meet, who don't have the basic necessities of life ... still understand that getting an education, which takes time and has no immediate alleviating benefits, can help them and is a path out of poverty. I did not intend to imply that they are somehow a lesser class of people, as you seem to imply with that statement.

Yes, my entire thread is basically defending poor people. They aren't stupid, they know education is important, they just can't invest long term. I don't understand why you are arguing with me.