X-Message-Number: 4128 Date: 01 Apr 95 14:55:59 EST From: Jim Davidson <> Subject: CryoNet #4111 - #4118 Yvan Bozzonetti makes the mildly outrageous comment that China is the most successful economy of the late 20th century. He claims it is a communist economy. While not being one who prefers death to redness, I am somewhat appalled at the misperception. China is most successful in those provinces that either embrace capitalism directly or deal through Hong Kong with the capitalist economies. During its various periods of devout Marxist-Leninist and devout Maoist communism, China was a shattered economy. Recent estimates suggest that under the leadership of Mao Zedong, some 80 million Chinese lost their lives in forced labor camps, designed famines, political pogroms, and various forms of brutality. Not a great bet for life extensionists if you ask me. The fact that China is growing today has much more to do with the greed of the leaders of their military, who own significant percentages of all the major companies in China, rather than any success of communism. At most, China today may be considered a centrally directed economy. There is limited state ownership of major industries, there is certainly nothing like a dictatorship of the proletariat, and even the most ardent communist in China doesn't accept the official exchange rate at face value. Yvan mistakenly projects current growth rates for China into the future assuming that the conditions which foster that growth today will be present in 20 years. Equally mistaken is the assumption that the conditions which are holding back growth in the US to below 5% per annum will be present for another five years. That mistake of projecting curves without looking at underlying variables might make a person conclude that life spans will grow only modestly in the next 50 years. Sure, they grew only modestly in the last 50 years, but the conditions of 50 years ago are not the same as the conditions of today. Meanwhile, the most successful economy in the world remains that of the United States. It still represents, by last measure I've seen, over one-fourth of the gross global product. That is, our GNP of over $6 trillion is the largest single share of the world's GGP of some $20 trillion. True, our per capita GNP is lower than those of some other countries. But that doesn't mean that a high standard of living is widely available in those other countries. Places like Brunei, United Arab Emirates, etc., have high GNP's for their population, but their leaders still head for Europe and the United States (and Houston's Texas Medical Center) in large numbers when they want to receive quality medical care. Are these issues significant to life extension enthusiasts? Of course they are. Economics is the engine of creativity. The country to be frozen in is the one which will be able to afford to unfreeze you in the future. More importantly, the country to live in is the country which has the most to offer in medical treatments and alternative medicine choices so you don't have to be frozen but can live until the various gene therapy and nanotechnology industries mature. It isn't clear to me that the US is that one preferred country, nor that only one such country exists. I would think there are probably at least a dozen advanced industrialized nations that can lay claim to good conditions for immortalists. (The US admittedly faces severe problems in its bureaucracies, notably the FDA, which limit access to useful treatments.) It may be appropriate to consider developing a new nation which even more closely supports our chosen long-term lifestyle. But is anyone seriously contemplating a move to the People's Republic of China in order to live longer and healthier? Does anyone seriously conceive that China will restore thousands of cryonically preserved sleepers to join their future teeming billions? Waiter! Reality check, please. Jim Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4128