Why are East Asian countries generally more developed than the rest of Asia?
In: 1
I think it seems that way when we view them through their exported media but it’s not necessarily true. Malaysia and Singapore, for example, are pretty developed by western standards. South Korea, on the other hand, has tonnes of poverty but high cost of living.
They had a gold start: before recent history, there was the silk way and the spice way.
You can see many wealthy states in those routes.
Example: Rome-Egypt-Persia-Oman-south India-Singapore-Corea-China. They are all blocks of a trade chain. Because the Central-northern Asia is geographically harsh land, plus it’s land so you can’t sail it, and sail boat do a lot more work per buck than any other transport, most trade went from China to the south to the now Emirates or Persia, to Iraq or Egypt, then shipped to the Mediterranean and reverse.
Because of this, all these land always had more income than others. More income, more money to develop, more money to adapt through history, accept changes, progress, and more importantly keep your trade stations and harbors new and shiny. So even if the trade changes, you are still a trader because you have the facilities to trade something.
There were ups and downs in all this places, but the downs were less destructive than for other civilizations.
It’s not east Asia, it’s SEA ASIA that is developed.
Why are East Asian countries generally more developed than the rest of Asia?
In: 1
I think it seems that way when we view them through their exported media but it’s not necessarily true. Malaysia and Singapore, for example, are pretty developed by western standards. South Korea, on the other hand, has tonnes of poverty but high cost of living.
They had a gold start: before recent history, there was the silk way and the spice way.
You can see many wealthy states in those routes.
Example: Rome-Egypt-Persia-Oman-south India-Singapore-Corea-China. They are all blocks of a trade chain. Because the Central-northern Asia is geographically harsh land, plus it’s land so you can’t sail it, and sail boat do a lot more work per buck than any other transport, most trade went from China to the south to the now Emirates or Persia, to Iraq or Egypt, then shipped to the Mediterranean and reverse.
Because of this, all these land always had more income than others. More income, more money to develop, more money to adapt through history, accept changes, progress, and more importantly keep your trade stations and harbors new and shiny. So even if the trade changes, you are still a trader because you have the facilities to trade something.
There were ups and downs in all this places, but the downs were less destructive than for other civilizations.
It’s not east Asia, it’s SEA ASIA that is developed.
Latest Answers