South Korean economist
(Hangul: 장하준; hanja: 張夏准; born 7 October 1963) is a South Korean institutional economist specialising in . Currently a reader in the Political Economy of Development at the University of Cambridge, Chang is the author of several widely discussed policy books, most notably Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective (2002). In 2013 Prospect magazine ranked Chang as one of the top 20 World Thinkers.
From: Wikiquote (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Partly, concidentally... we've... seen the rise of anti-racist movement... in the US and around the world... [W]e should use this as an occasion... establishing in countries that don't have it, but also strengthening the universal welfare state that we have in some countries, using this as an occasion to push further for actions... to push back these reactionary racist forces... [T]hose kind of things that are now in many peoples' minds. Perhaps... people thought those are ideally things that we want to have, but we cannot. But now we know that we can, and... if you look... countries that have taken a more solidaristic approach to this pandemic are the ones that have done better.
The pandemic has revealed that... poor people—people in marginalized communities—are more prone to contract the disease and die from it because of generally worse health, limited access to health care, and other things that define this unequal society. ...[A] positive way to respond to this is to accept that and find a way to reduce that inequality, and it is already happening in some countries. ...I'm not usually a cheerleader for my own country, South Korea... we have so many shameful world records... the highest suicide rate, the lowest fertility rate... name it, but South Korea has... managed the pandemic really well, first of all because... despite this general aversion to the welfare state, it has a very robust public health insurance. ...So anyone who had problems could... get tested and treated... This is how you manage to keep the death toll under 300, but in that country... because it controlled the health situation so well, it actually didn't go into full lockdown, but still, people were wary of going out and the biggest sufferers from this was... people... running small bars, restaurants, karaoke bars... [T]hese people were very hard hit and... I was... surprised [the country is] talking about universal employment insurance scheme. So... it doesn't matter what your job used to be... Countries are now talking about introducing that covers people who work in any type of company, self-employed people, social platform workers, people working in the . ...[I]f it happens it will be a really progressive change...
Enhance Your Quote Experience
Enjoy ad-free browsing, unlimited collections, and advanced search features with Premium.
[E]conomics can never be a science in the sense that physics or chemistry is. There are many different types of economic theory, each emphasizing different aspects of a complex reality, making different moral and political value judgments and drawing different conclusions. ...[E]conomic theories constantly fail to predict real-world developments... not least because human beings have... free will, unlike chemical molecules or [other] physical objects.
Ricardo's theory is absolutely right—within its narrow confines. His theory correctly says that, accepting their current levels of technology as given, it is better for countries to specialize in things that they are relatively better at. One cannot argue with that. His theory fails when a country wants to acquire more advanced technologies—that is, when it wants to develop its economy. It takes time and experience to absorb new technologies, so technologically backward producers need a period of protection from international competition during this period of learning. Such protection is costly, because the country is giving up the chance to import better and cheaper products. However, it is a price that has to be paid if it wants to develop advanced industries. Ricardo's theory is, thus seen, for those who accept the status quo but not for those who want to change it.
[T]his has been the most corrosive consequence of the recent rise of the... extreme right, but... despite all this mistrust, we have to invest in rebuilding trust in these institutions. Maybe some of the existing institutions have become so discredited, they need to be scrapped. ...Maybe some can be redeemed, but also we could try to create ...a global public information service ...[T]hat sounds overly idealistic, but... it's something that we need because these gainers from the erosion of public trust in these public s... also ...control the media with their money. ...[I]f ...citizens do not have... a UN information service or some global charity that provides fact checks [etc.]... Unless people have these trusted sources, they'll begin to believe whatever... and those who control the media, including things like Facebook [etc.]... through their money will... be in a position to manipulate them to their benefit. ...[D]espite people's misgivings about building yet another international organization trying to restore trust in the public institutions that have already been eroded and dilapidated .., that's the only way out because otherwise it becomes a free-for-all... [which] means all those people with money...
<nowiki>[</nowiki>Capitalism...] [I]t's not how it will change, but how we have to change it... because given the existing , and power, unless the ordinary citizens and the progressive people get organized and press the governments, they are not going to change things automatically. ...We've seen that after the 2008 financial crisis... so for about... 9 months they embraced Keynes... and then the bailed out banks [etc]... and they were going to reform the financial system... After 2 years it was... back to the old game... and then things got even worse because... in some countries like the US and the UK... the right-wing governments were elected, and then... in the US... Donald Trump... invalidated many of the reforms that were introduced to the financial market, after Obama, after the crisis... [I]f we don't keep fighting it's not going to change... [T]here are new opportunities and new solidarities emerging... new ways of thinking, but... how they all will gel together and translate into collective action, public policies, institutional changes, that's... up to us. Everyone.
The historical picture is clear. ing was not invented in modern Asia. When they were backward themselves in terms of knowledge, all of today's rich countries blithely violated other people's patents, s and copyrights. The Swiss 'borrowed' German chemical inventions, while the Germans 'borrowed' English trademarks and the 'borrowed' British copyrighted materials—all without paying what would today be considered 'just' compensation.
Enhance Your Quote Experience
Enjoy ad-free browsing, unlimited collections, and advanced search features with Premium.
[W]e will need to rethink our priorities... not just at the individual level, but at the social level... In Britain we had these weird Thursday evenings... when we clapped for the NHS workers while the government was not willing to pay even a single more penny to them. That kind of thing has to change... We need to have the confidence to say that "Yes, there are things that are more fundamental, that are more important, that are not necessarily going to be rewarded by the market, and... the society has to find a way to make... [those] people... more rewarded, including... people who do unpaid care work at home." We need to rethink the ... [A] lot of scientists say... [as] an inevitable consequence of human encroachment in nature, we need to rethink our balance with nature, part of which is... that due to the unequal nature of many of our societies... There are a lot of countries where you have these farmers doing... and... encroaching into nature when there are fallow lands that are owned by s. So we need to rethink all these priorities...