78976013376073041739.pdf

carl-Aug. Heinz COnCLusiOn
And last but not least, I would
like to let you know what an old
professor for national economy and
finance system explained to us in
September 1970 in our first lecture:
He said that China will save the
world (and America may be in
danger of gliding into the abyss).
For us freshmen both were
implausible because at that time
America was still (or pretended to
be) big and strong and China was
in a sorry state because the big step
promised by Mao to the country
was not only a belly flop but a back
breaker and the country had fallen
into more poverty!
The old experienced professor
answered our questions and
remarks and told us that America
looked very strong only from
the outside but is running on a
dangerous path where the people
and the country spend more than
they can afford - and besides, the
United States produces too many
lawyers.
We, Germans, could understand in
a certain way the first part of the
explanation since we were raised
in such a way that you should not
spend more than you can afford,
but less, and also should put some
money aside. And you should not
spend more money than you earn.
But we could not understand the
issue with the lawyers and therefore
we went on asking questions.
The explanation of this partial
aspect of the American fall or at
least the endangerment of the
United States was that we should
imagine what is happening in a
State without normative legislation
(like Napoleon did in Continental
Europe) but with the so called
Case Law (like England and the
Old Germans used to have), and
which produces too many lawyers
trying to enter into the legislation
(parliaments). They definitely were
no trouble solvers but trouble
makers, because they wanted to
secure their own incomes! We
understood that but only to some
degree.
But we could not understand how
China should save the world,
and our Professor’s farsighted
explanation could not convince
us, since there was no proof for it.
But the explanation was that we
should not let ourselves be misled
by the poverty of the Chinese (at
this time) because one billion
people (approx. the population in
1970), mostly young, were living
full of privation and were used to
hard work, wanted a better life.
And considering that state and
that the people were debt-free
and credit-worthy and, if they
would use the credits in a clever
way, they could bring forward not
only themselves and their country
but the whole world for one or
even two generations, since credit
is the grease for the economy
engine and credits are something
like medicine. So the old Roman
knowledge „Dosis venenum
facit” (the quantity makes the
poison) applies here, too, and
the Americans had taken already
too much medicine and were still
indulging. Though the Chinese
however, would still have this
possibility of „healthy doping“!
And I have been following the
Chinese economy and society
since 1994 and particularly
during the last five years and
I can say that we are now
exactly at the point predicted
by Mr. Professor Rechtenwald.
Let’s now wait and see if the
Chinese lose or use their
creditworthiness, since their
economic and financial policy
has been so far quite intelligent!
However the intelligence they
have shown up to now is no
warranty for the future, because
the Chinese, know for their very
long (cultural and economic)
history, have also shown that
their rulers, in their exuberance
and with wrong targets, have
sometimes failed to use financial
and tax policies wisely.
And so I want to finish with one
of my father’s saying: “People
create no paradise on earth“
but, I believe, at least everyone
should strive for a reasonable
life together!
Yours,
HEINZGLAS KLEINTETTAU
+ PLASTICS
99