(1) East Asian countries (regions) can adjust their economic development strategies in a timely manner according to their national conditions and the development of the domestic and international economic situation. However, Latin America has repeatedly delayed the opportunity to adjust its development strategy.

East Asian countries (regions) have experienced the period of implementing the development strategy of import substitution industrialization after the war or after independence. At that time, they had just recovered their economic sovereignty from imperialism and began to master their own economic lifeline. Their national economy is still very young and fragile, and the competitiveness of enterprises is very poor. It is necessary to focus on developing industries that replace imports, so that its economy can spend its childhood under the protection of the state. However, there are many economies in this region with insufficient resources, small scale and limited domestic market. Under this condition, the development of import substitution industries generally encounters the problems of insufficient supply of production factors, rapid growth of productive import demand and slow growth of product export capacity, which affects the balance of international payments and greatly restricts the rapid economic expansion. One of the outstanding features of the post-war world economy is the rapid development of economic internationalization. Economic internationalization means great changes in global resource allocation. After the mid-1960s, multinational corporations rose widely, and industrial transfer gradually spread around the world. East Asian countries (regions) aim at this favorable opportunity and change their development strategies in time, from developing import substitution industries to implementing export-oriented industrialization strategies. For example, the "Four Smalls" completed this transformation in the second half of the 1960s and ASEAN in the 1970s. Since then, the "four small" and "ASEAN" countries in East Asia have implemented the policy of opening to the outside world, actively introduced foreign investment, accelerated the development of export-oriented industries, and carried out a series of adjustments and reforms in foreign exchange management, tariff system, foreign investment policy and import and export policy, so that their (regional) economies are fully integrated into the world economy. In the process of participating in the world economic operation, enterprises have withstood the test of survival of the fittest, greatly improved their competitiveness, and greatly strengthened their adaptability to the storms of the world market.

The situation in Latin American countries is just the opposite. In 1930s and 1940s, several major countries began to implement the import substitution development strategy, which was widely implemented in almost all countries after the war. During the strategic transformation of East Asia's economic development, Latin American countries also generally adhered to the theoretical propositions of developmentalism and economic nationalism, emphasizing on maintaining and striving for the independence of the national economy and pursuing the upgrading of import substitution. That is, from the import substitution of general consumer goods to the import substitution of durable consumer goods, from the import substitution of light industrial products to the import substitution of some heavy industrial products. Under the guidance of this guiding ideology and development strategy, industrialization is developed under the high protection of the state. The export competitiveness of imported substitute products is weak, and the import of spare parts and raw materials is growing rapidly. The industrialization process is slow, and the structure of export commodities has not changed much for a long time. By the early 1990s, the export of primary products still accounted for 2/3 of all Latin American exports. In fact, it relies on the production and export of primary products to accumulate funds, provide foreign exchange and support industrial development. On the other hand, industry has not provided enough assistance to non-industrial sectors. This makes the industrial development lack of stamina. From the 1930s to the mid-1980s, this development strategy lasted more than 40 years. Its advantages have come to an end, but its disadvantages are becoming increasingly obvious. (2) East Asian countries (regions) should pay attention to maintaining a low inflation rate while their economies are growing at a high speed. However, Latin America has not paid enough attention to controlling inflation and taken improper measures.

When the inflation rate rises, most countries (regions) in East Asia immediately take measures to curb inflation at the initial stage of the rise. For example, Taiwan Province Province experienced serious inflation after 1949. Currency change measures and American aid support eased the financial imbalance, and prices were basically stable after 1953. In the next few decades, macroeconomic stability will be basically maintained, except for a short-term rise due to two oil price increases. Since the 1960s, the inflation rate has reached double digits in only four years, and it has been at 1 digit in other years, and it has been negative in four years. The Thai government clearly put forward the macroeconomic policy of "stability first, development second", and there was no hyperinflation, which created a good environment for economic operation. During the period of 196 1- 1987, the average annual economic growth was 7%. South Korea is a country with high inflation in East Asia. Especially in the 1970s, under the impact of rising oil prices and global inflation, the average annual inflation rate of 1973- 1979 rose to 18%, and 1978 once reached 60%. The government immediately adopted the policy of adjusting the development strategy, reducing the growth rate and seeking growth in stability. At the same time, measures such as strictly controlling currency issuance, raising interest rates, balancing budgets, controlling public utility charges, and freezing prices have been implemented. After 1983, the rising rate of consumer price has dropped to 1 digit.

Inflation in Latin America is not a simple overheating phenomenon, but one of the serious consequences caused by structural economic imbalance. Latin America's low-level industrial structure, long-term imbalance between total supply and total demand, serious price distortion caused by excessive state intervention, long-term high exchange rate and excessive introduction of foreign capital, coupled with the pursuit of high growth indicators and inappropriate monetary and credit policies, have caused strange long-term ultra-high inflation worldwide. Several countries with the most serious inflation have implemented some anti-inflation plans or policies. However, both the austerity-oriented approach of monetarism and the liberalization-oriented approach of structuralism are in a dilemma and cannot achieve good results. Some countries (such as Brazil) have no choice but to implement indexation measures to link monetary assets and monetary income with inflation rate. Although it has played a certain role in ensuring that the real income will not be excessively damaged, it will eventually lead to the inertia of inflation. Only in recent years, through economic reform, the structural imbalance in the economy has been reversed to a certain extent, and anti-inflation measures have been effective. However, the long-term uncontrolled hyperinflation has undermined the normal functioning of the market mechanism and hindered economic development.

(3) East Asian countries (regions) pay attention to the continuous upgrading of industrial structure, while Latin American industrial structure changes slowly.

The industrial structure of East Asian countries (regions) has gradually evolved from low to high. In different periods, according to the development of their own (regional) economy and the trend of world industrial development, they constantly promote the upgrading of their own (regional) industrial structure. For example, South Korea concentrated on developing labor-intensive textile industry in 1960s. In 1970s, it turned to focus on developing capital-intensive heavy chemical industry, and developed ten strategic industries, including steel, nonferrous metals, machinery, shipbuilding, automobiles, electronics, petrochemicals, cement, ceramics and fiber. The government has implemented preferential policies and given assistance to these ten major industrial sectors. In the 1980s, it further developed into a technology and knowledge-intensive industry. The government clearly put forward the slogan of "building the country through science and technology", and listed the five major departments of electronics, machinery, bioengineering, information industry and atomic energy utilization as "national policy strategic industries" to vigorously promote its development. According to the plan of Korea Development Research Institute, by 2000, the tertiary industry will account for 59. 1% of the national gross national product, industrial and mining and public construction will account for 32.8%, and agriculture will fall to 8. 1%. It is planned to catch up with advanced countries in seven high-tech fields, and the output value of these seven industries will account for 18% of GDP. Other countries (regions) in East Asia have also taken measures along this track to promote the upgrading of industrial structure. For example, Singapore put forward the slogan of "the second industrial revolution" in 1979, and Taiwan Province Province promulgated the Regulations on Promoting Industrial Upgrading in 1990. They all have grand plans to develop new industries, meet the 2 1 century and leap to a new level, and are implementing them. The industrial structure of ASEAN countries is unbalanced, basically in the process of industrialization, and has not yet entered the stage of developing knowledge and technology-intensive industries, but they all strive to follow the footsteps of "four small" and gradually upgrade their industrial structures.

The industrial upgrading of East Asian countries (regions) depends on the stepped international division of labor in East Asia. Japanese industrial upgrading drives the industrial upgrading of "four small" industries, and then drives the industrial upgrading of "ASEAN" and China, South China and Indochina countries. Because in countries living in a high ladder, mature and over-developed industries that have lost their comparative advantages or industries that do not adapt to the changed conditions in their own countries (such as rising wages, labor shortage or exchange rate changes) need to move outward to seek favorable investment places. This will inevitably lead to the industrial upgrading of neighboring countries (regions) with relatively backward industrial structure. The industrial upgrading of the latter brings competitive pressure to the former, and the latter in turn pushes the former to accelerate industrial upgrading. This interaction and complementary role has promoted the continuous improvement of industrial structure in East Asian countries (regions).

This is not the case in Latin America. Although Latin America is the only region in the third world that belongs to middle-income countries except a few countries, although Latin American industry has also developed greatly after the war, there is no obvious gradual upgrading of industrial structure. The dual structure of modern industrial sector and traditional industrial sector in Latin America is very prominent. Most countries in Latin America still belong to the industrial structure of resource development. The industrial structure formed in the past history, which mainly produces and exports one, two or several primary products, has not been fundamentally changed, although its proportion has declined and industrial diversification has also developed. For example, oil from Venezuela, Mexico, Colombia and Ecuador, mining from Peru, copper from Chile, coffee from countries on both sides of the equator, bananas from the Caribbean and so on. It is still a key sector that affects the economic situation of various countries. This is one of the important reasons for the slow growth of Latin American economic vitality.

(D) East Asian countries (regions) have high internal capital accumulation rate and good efficiency in utilizing foreign capital, while Latin America has low internal capital accumulation rate and many mistakes in utilizing foreign capital.

East Asian countries (regions) have a tradition of thrift and are good at accumulating wealth. The accumulation rate in these countries (regions) is generally high. In Latin America, influenced by western consumerism, the tendency of ahead consumption is more common. Therefore, the accumulation rate of the two regions is obviously different. According to the statistics of the World Bank, the domestic savings rates of 1965, 1970 and 1990 are 22%, 25% and 35% in East Asia and 22%, 20% and 22% in Latin America respectively. The high savings rate in East Asia leads to high capital accumulation, thus ensuring a high investment rate. For example, in the 1980s, the savings rates of the "four small" countries were all above 30%. Among them, Singapore is as high as 42.3%, so its investment rate is as high as 42%. The low savings rate in Latin America makes it difficult for its investment rate to increase significantly. The investment rate in Latin America is generally around 20%, which dropped significantly in the 1980s. In the mid-1980s, it dropped to about 16%.

In terms of utilizing foreign capital, East Asia is much more open to the outside world than Latin America. As East Asia completed the transition to an export-oriented economy as early as the 1960s and 1970s, there was little resistance to utilizing foreign capital and strong management ability. Take "four small" as an example. As a free port, Hong Kong is basically open to foreign direct investment, foreign banks and foreign financial institutions. Hong Kong has become one of the international financial centers in Asia. Singapore has enacted a series of laws to encourage foreign direct investment, established a set of efficient management institutions and created a good investment environment, especially encouraging foreign investment that can bring high technology. And put domestic enterprises in the fierce competition environment of foreign-funded enterprises to exercise their ability to survive and develop. South Korea uses foreign capital mainly by borrowing, and introduces foreign direct investment appropriately. In the 1960s, it mainly used American aid, and in the 1970s, it mainly borrowed from international financial institutions and international financial markets. South Korea's borrowing scale is very large, with a total foreign debt of nearly $50 billion in 1985, making it the third largest debtor country in the world. Although the debt repayment burden is heavy under the background of high interest rate policy in the United States, due to the proper use and management of borrowed funds, more than 80% of them are used to import capital goods and invest in export-oriented manufacturing and infrastructure, so the export growth is rapid and the capital turnover is fast, which is easy to form new debt repayment ability and will not lead to debt crisis. After the 1980s, attention should be paid to controlling the scale of loans, increasing the proportion of foreign direct investment in the utilization of foreign capital, and maintaining a virtuous circle of the utilization of foreign capital. Taiwan Province pays equal attention to borrowing and introducing foreign direct investment. In the 1950s, the United States gave priority to aid, in the 1960s, overseas Chinese and foreign direct investment were introduced, and in the 1970s, a large amount of debt was borrowed to solve the shortage of funds for the implementation of "Ten Projects" and "Twelve Projects". Its borrowing and direct investment are mainly used to enhance its export capacity, introduce advanced technology and meet the needs of industrial restructuring, so it can quickly form new productive forces and its solvency will also be enhanced.

Latin America also adopts two ways: borrowing and introducing direct investment, but pays more attention to borrowing. From 196 1- 1983, the net inflow of foreign direct investment in Latin America was less than 1000 billion US dollars, and the balance of foreign debt reached 360 billion US dollars by the end of 1983. Latin America used a large amount of foreign capital, which really played an important role in making up for its lack of accumulation capacity and promoting economic development in the 1960s and 1970s. However, due to theoretical deviation, it was believed that borrowing was more conducive to maintaining the independence of the national economy than introducing direct investment, and was tempted by the low international interest rate in the 1970s. It misjudged the changing trend of international interest rates, borrowed a huge amount of foreign debt far beyond its solvency, and laid the foundation for the debt crisis in the 1980s. In addition to uncontrollable borrowing scale and sharp increase in international interest rates, the debt crisis is also caused by improper management of foreign debts in Latin American countries. Some countries use loans too much for projects with long cycle and slow results, and cannot create solvency in time. Some countries use it for unconstructive expenditures, such as paying military expenditures, making up fiscal deficits, or for financial speculation, and they cannot create their own solvency.

(5) The governments of East Asia and Latin America have different degrees and ways of intervening in the economy, and play different roles in the market mechanism.

East Asian countries (regions) and Latin American countries are market economy countries (regions) that combine government intervention and market regulation. But the degree and way of government intervention are very different. Hong Kong has the lowest degree of intervention, which is generally called non-intervention or positive non-intervention. As a free port management, the government still has to intervene when it encounters inflation, economic depression, stock market fluctuation and export obstruction. Generally speaking, the government focuses on infrastructure construction, formulates laws and regulations, provides legal protection and social welfare insurance, and creates conditions for economic development. Other countries in East Asia are basically government-led market economy countries. The leading role of the government is as follows: 1. The government formulates long-term or short-term economic development plans. Although it is not a mandatory plan, the government also takes supporting measures and reward and punishment measures from the aspects of investment, taxation and interest rate to promote the implementation of the plan; 2. The government owns a certain number of state-owned enterprises, which control the economic lifeline; 3. The state controls most infrastructure and public utilities; 4. The government guides the market economy through various economic levers, promotes economic growth, prevents and overcomes economic depression, suppresses inflation, improves the investment environment, and balances international payments; 5. Mediation and handling of labor disputes; 6. Open up foreign economic contact channels and serve foreign economic exchanges of enterprises. The leading role of the above governments is indispensable in all countries (regions). The difference between East Asia and Latin America is that the degree of government intervention in East Asia has been weakening since the early 1970s. Because the development of export-oriented economy requires the domestic economy to operate according to the objective laws of market economy, so as to connect with the world market. Too much administrative intervention can easily lead to market distortion and artificial imbalance. The high protection of Latin American domestic market makes it difficult to weaken the government's administrative intervention. Many countries have long implemented high tariffs, high exchange rates, strict financial control, nationalization of a high proportion of enterprises and banks, and strict control of import and export trade, which are not conducive to exerting their own economic potential. It was not until the mid-1980s that there were obvious changes after the economic reform. This has led to the full development of the East Asian market economy, while the Latin American market system is very imperfect and the market mechanism has not fully played its role. This is why the economic adjustment and reform in Latin America in the 1980s was characterized by transformation, which was very difficult.

(vi) Influence of other factors

The factors influencing the development trend difference between East Asia and Latin America are diverse and complex, including other economic and non-economic factors. For example, the political situation in East Asia is more stable than that in Latin America. East Asia is deeply influenced by Confucian culture and has its unique advantages. East Asian countries (regions) are less restricted by pre-capitalist factors. Hong Kong and Singapore are cities and city countries, and there is no burden to transform rural areas. Taiwan Province Province and South Korea carried out land reform seriously after the war. The rural economy of ASEAN countries is also bound by pre-capitalist economic relations, but its management mode is mainly small-scale peasant economy, which is easy to connect with market economy. The backward manor system in rural areas of Latin America not only causes unreasonable distribution, but also causes a lot of land waste and resource waste. Moreover, the governments of many Latin American countries have little determination, slow progress and uneven development in unreasonable land system reform. Obviously, pre-capitalist economic relations are an important factor hindering the modernization process. There are many other influencing factors, so I won't elaborate on them.

Comparing East Asia and Latin America as two regions, we can see obvious differences, but the situation of countries in each region is also different. Due to the limitation of space, when comparing the two regions, we can only choose the characteristics that most regions have. For a few countries different from those described in this paper, such as Chile and most countries in Latin America, as well as ASEAN countries such as the Philippines and Brunei, it is impossible to make a detailed analysis.

The differences between East Asia and Latin America in these important aspects can be attributed to the differences in development models. Through comparison, we can see that the development model of East Asia has obvious advantages.