We have at least one member on this forum who has a habit of flooding the discussion with propaganda for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This is done in an essentially deceptive manner, as it is presented as something else with no link to the CCP.

I suspect we have had a few different ones in the past. They could be a bot, a paid propagandist, or a "little pink" - a member of the volunteer army of online supporters of the CCP, typically naïve young females from smaller Chinese cities.

You can usually identify them by the following traits:
[list bull-blackball]

Highly repetitive.

Tries to make every thread with a similar sounding topic about the same thing.

Will have the same identical argument with you multiple times without appearing to realise.

Very narrow range of interests.

Very shallow arguments - if you enquire about what they mean, you quickly end up with something meaningless, a circular argument, or an unusual sounding insult.

Does not appear to have English as a first language - superficially the English is reasonable, but they don't really get the meaning of a lot of words and phrases they use. This can make discussions fairly pointless, as they ignore any attempt to address the difference in meaning and just go on using the terms with a different, unexplained meaning.

Does not appear to be human. They come across as either a bot, a paid propagandist, or a mixture of both - eg a paid propagandist or little pink using AI tools like chat GPT to write their posts. They lack a genuine emotional or ideological investment in what they say - think of someone who is paid to spread propaganda but is bored and disinterested in what they post, the ideas behind it, or the people they are talking to.

They do not appear to be making any great effort to convince you of anything (or even understand what others are saying). Rather, they appear to be merely making the propaganda available to Chinese people so that they see the same thing on foreign websites and (hopefully) do not dig too far behind it.

As part of this, they make a half-hearted attempt to appear to be a local, in order to create the impression that the propaganda is not unique to China. However they will usually make some obvious mistakes if you can engage them on local issues, basic facts, local customs or even common slang.
The reason behind this is that they are promoting whatever the current CCP policy is, but wrapping it up in western-sounding terms and slogans. As most of the issues of interest to a non-Chinese audience are economic, a favourite approach is to call it Modern Monetary Theory - this is a fairly vague set of loosely associated theories that allows CCP policy to be presented as something that is taken seriously by academia.

When it comes to that other major area of foreign interest - human rights, the approach is generally to attack these ideas using strawmen. For example to pretend that anyone who supports human rights does so from an ideology that human rights are "natural" rights that literally exist in nature. They then try to argue that human rights do not exist because they cannot be found in a biology textbook.

Whatever the discussion, what you end up with is a hodg-podge of CCP policies and thought bubbles, wrapped in western-sounding terms, but once you peel back the wrapping there is nothing there. The actual source (the CCP) is being obfuscated. They do not really understand or appreciate democracy, human rights or capitalism, and are probably using AI and automatic translation tools to argue in a foreign language about concepts they do not really understand or care about, or are hostile to (because the CCP considers them a threat to their authority). Thus their approach tends to be to have a lot of essentially shallow, circular, often identical discussions about the same topic.

Some examples:

Benign Dictatorship

The Price of Money

Equality Before the Law

Backing a Currency With Gold

CCP Stooges Openly Attack Basic Freedoms

Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)

CCP stooges: Chinese People Despise Democracy

CCP stooges: our parties are racist

Delusional CCP Propaganda

CCP: life is best in China

CCP stooges: less poverty in China than the west

CCP lying to Chinese people about covid deaths

CCP stooges invent "right" to money

Little Pink

Little Pinks vs Equality

Little Pinks vs Jews

Little Pinks vs Democracy

Little Pinks vs Reason and Randianism

Little Pinks: War = Consensus

China: Little Pinks See Merit in 50 Million Dead

Little Pinks "Trust the WHO Stats

Chinese Concept of Justice

Democratic Peace

CCP Invents "Democracy Without Elections"

The Great Chinese Famine

Who killed more Chinese people?
- some other stooges in this one

Source of CCP Authority

Another behaviour:
[list bull-blackball]

Nothing that goes wrong in China while the leader is alive is the party's fault.

Once the leader is dead (eg, Mao), everything that went wrong is their fault, and "the leader is not the party".

Things that have gone wrong in China since Mao are either someone else's fault (eg, America is to blame for China's economic slowdown under the current leader Xi Jinping, it has nothing to do with Xi winding back his predecessor's economic reforms), or simply denied (within China, the denial might take the form of journalists disappearing into the Chinese justice system - eg covid lies and coverups, Tiananmen square).


The CCP is oppressing religious groups within China, in particular Muslims. At the same time it is promoting Islamic terrorism in the middle east and elsewhere, on the grounds that the west is a common enemy of the CCP and the terrorists. On the propaganda side, it takes a particularly bureaucratic approach, essentially opposing Israel's existence because the paperwork is not in order.

Israel'sexistence illegal, until UN creates it

CCP is supporting islamic terrorism

Is the CCP evil?

Quality of Chinese Construction

Does 50 Million Dead Count as Murder?

Little Pinks Believe in Free Money

Little Pinks: Surrender or Die (=Negotiation)

CCP Subsidising Electric Vehicles

CCP are fast learners

CCP stooges: entire Muslim world supports Israel

LittlePinks: China More Stable

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 12:22pm:

We have at least one member on this forum who has a habit of flooding the discussion with propaganda...

Hey FD, you abandoning the "foundations" thread already"?

Can't win the argument re the sources/foundations for ideas like morality, justice and fairness?

Hence your usual pathetic detour to the CCP?

Deplorable.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 12:31pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:22pm: We have at least one member on this forum who has a habit of flooding the discussion with propaganda... Hey FD, you abandoning the "foundations" thread already"? Can't win the argument re the sources/foundations for ideas like morality, justice and fairness? Hence your usual pathetic detour to the CCP? Deplorable.

Ah.... so YOU are the CCP stooge, parrot?

Quelle surprise!!!!  Would NEVER have guessed....  :o :o

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 12:31pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:22pm: We have at least one member on this forum who has a habit of flooding the discussion with propaganda... Hey FD, you abandoning the "foundations" thread already"? Can't win the argument re the sources/foundations for ideas like morality, justice and fairness? Hence your usual pathetic detour to the CCP? Deplorable.

How similar would you say that the views you express on here are to CCP policy?

Dear thegreatdivide ,

are you now or have you ever been, a member of the communist party?

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 12:40pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:31pm: freediver wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:22pm: We have at least one member on this forum who has a habit of flooding the discussion with propaganda... Hey FD, you abandoning the "foundations" thread already"? Can't win the argument re the sources/foundations for ideas like morality, justice and fairness? Hence your usual pathetic detour to the CCP? Deplorable. How similar would you say that the views you express on here are to CCP policy?

Well...I do like the 'common prosperity' proposition which Xi has recently reaffirmed (after the Evergrande private sector disaster). 

But (my turn to ask a question):  have you abandoned examining the sources/foundations of or for ideas like morality, justice and fairness?

Is there any CCP policy you do not agree with?

How similar would you say that the views you express on here are to CCP policy?

Once Trump defuses any hostility towards China and Russia and they are forced to save face against his 'peaceful' stance.
China and Russia will turn on each other for lack of being able to turn on the USA that has justified their reason to exist mostly.
There will be fireworks tonight Johnny!!  :D ;D

3-1 China will beat its former oppressor and land stealer.  ;)

Bobby. wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 12:53pm:

Dear thegreatdivide , are you now or have you ever been, a member of the communist party?

No.

Does it still exist in Oz?

In any case, I now understand the current economic orthodoxy is the reason for the catastrophic failure to house and employ everyone at above poverty level, in the anglo countries and elsewhere.  

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 1:35pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:53pm: Dear thegreatdivide , are you now or have you ever been, a member of the communist party? No. Does it still exist in Oz? In any case, I now understand the current economic orthodoxy is the reason for the catastrophic failure to house and employ everyone at above poverty level, in the anglo countries and elsewhere.

You know our unemployment benefits are more than double the median Chinese wage, right?

freediver wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 1:29pm:

Is there any CCP policy you do not agree with? How similar would you say that the views you express on here are to CCP policy?

Another two questions....and you didn't answer my ONE question - not  a good look for you...

A: not sure; my main concern is to see the CCP implement its "common prosperity" goal, which - as the recent 'two sessions' conference in Bejing reveals - remains the goal, via maximizing sustainable national development through self-reliance in technological development, opening up to foreign investment
and markets, moving up the production value chain into high quality goods,  and modernization to create a "beautiful, green, prosperous China". 

Whereas mainstream western goons want to ridicule "common prosperity".... 

Deplorable. 

The role of the Yellow Man in Asia is just to breed mass-production, not to 'rule' - that belongs to a Black Man.  :D


...the role of the Black Man in Africa is just to breed mass-production, not to 'rule' - that belongs to a Yellow Man.  :D

...and so on with the other Regions and their major players.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 1:56pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 1:29pm: Is there any CCP policy you do not agree with? How similar would you say that the views you express on here are to CCP policy? Another two questions....and you didn't answer my ONE question - not  a good look for you... A: not sure; my main concern is to see the CCP implement its "common prosperity" goal, which - as the recent 'two sessions' conference in Bejing reveals - remains the goal, via maximizing sustainable national development through self-reliance in technological development, opening up to foreign investment and markets, moving up the production value chain into high quality goods,  and modernization to create a "beautiful, green, prosperous China".  Whereas mainstream western goons want to ridicule "common prosperity"....  Deplorable.

It is not another two questions. It is the same question you dodged previously. I think we are getting very close to finding some common ground. Let's try again:

Are you aware of any way in which your posts here contradict CCP policy?

freediver wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 1:41pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 1:35pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:53pm: Dear thegreatdivide , are you now or have you ever been, a member of the communist party? No. Does it still exist in Oz? In any case, I now understand the current economic orthodoxy is the reason for the catastrophic failure to house and employ everyone at above poverty level, in the anglo countries and elsewhere.   You know our unemployment benefits are more than double the median Chinese wage, right?

You aren't aware of PPP, obviously.

The 'welfare safety net' in Oz (and other rich anglo countries)  is well below the poverty line, while median wage in China is well above poverty, in China.  

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:02pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 1:41pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 1:35pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:53pm: Dear thegreatdivide , are you now or have you ever been, a member of the communist party? No. Does it still exist in Oz? In any case, I now understand the current economic orthodoxy is the reason for the catastrophic failure to house and employ everyone at above poverty level, in the anglo countries and elsewhere.   You know our unemployment benefits are more than double the median Chinese wage, right? You aren't aware of PPP, obviously. The 'welfare safety net' in Oz (and other rich anglo countries)  is well below the poverty line.

How far below?

freediver wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:03pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:02pm: freediver wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 1:41pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 1:35pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:53pm: Dear thegreatdivide , are you now or have you ever been, a member of the communist party? No. Does it still exist in Oz? In any case, I now understand the current economic orthodoxy is the reason for the catastrophic failure to house and employ everyone at above poverty level, in the anglo countries and elsewhere.   You know our unemployment benefits are more than double the median Chinese wage, right? You aren't aware of PPP, obviously. The 'welfare safety net' in Oz (and other rich anglo countries)  is well below the poverty line.    How far below?

You missed the edit:

"The 'welfare safety net' in Oz (and other rich anglo countries)  is well below the poverty line, while median wage in China is well above poverty, in China. 

How far below?

Are you aware of any way in which your posts on this forum contradict CCP policy?

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 1:35pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:53pm: Dear thegreatdivide , are you now or have you ever been, a member of the communist party? No. Does it still exist in Oz? In any case, I now understand the current economic orthodoxy is the reason for the catastrophic failure to house and employ everyone at above poverty level, in the anglo countries and elsewhere.

Of course it exists.

I'm sorry to say that you still got second prize -
you were added to the list of cultural Marxists:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1660808671/1110#1110

freediver wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:15pm:

How far below?

Doesn't matter; poverty is poverty - destroying health and social cohesion. 

And are you now aware of PPP?


Quote:

Are you aware of any way in which your posts on this forum contradict CCP policy?

No, since my posts are almost exclusivley concerned with  the concept of "common prosperity" - which your blind "individual rights" ideology renders unattainable because individuals are naturally competitive and self-interested. 

Quote:

No, since my posts are almost exclusivley concrned with  the conept of "common prosperity" - which your blind "individual rights" ideology renders unattainable because individuals are naturally competitive and self-interested.

Are you saying this is the reason why your posts on this forum are indistinguishable from CCP policy?

Bobby. wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:23pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 1:35pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:53pm: Dear thegreatdivide , are you now or have you ever been, a member of the communist party? No. Does it still exist in Oz? In any case, I now understand the current economic orthodoxy is the reason for the catastrophic failure to house and employ everyone at above poverty level, in the anglo countries and elsewhere.   Of course it exists. I'm sorry to say that you still got second prize - you were added to the list of cultural Marxists: https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1660808671/1110#1110

How does not being a member of the communist party make me a 'cultural marxist'?

freediver wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:26pm:

Quote: No, since my posts are almost exclusively concerned with  the concept of "common prosperity" - which your blind "individual rights" ideology renders unattainable because individuals are naturally competitive and self-interested. Are you saying this is the reason why your posts on this forum are indistinguishable from CCP policy?

Poor FD's low IQ:

No,  I'm saying I'm only addressing ONE CCP policy.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:31pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:26pm: Quote: No, since my posts are almost exclusivley concrned with  the conept of "common prosperity" - which your blind "individual rights" ideology renders unattainable because individuals are naturally competitive and self-interested. Are you saying this is the reason why your posts on this forum are indistinguishable from CCP policy? Poor FD's low IQ: No,  I'm saying I'm only addressing ONE CCP policy.

Which one?

Does this policy encompass economics, human rights, democracy and Israel?

freediver wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:33pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:31pm: freediver wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:26pm: Quote: No, since my posts are almost exclusivley concrned with  the conept of "common prosperity" - which your blind "individual rights" ideology renders unattainable because individuals are naturally competitive and self-interested. Are you saying this is the reason why your posts on this forum are indistinguishable from CCP policy? Poor FD's low IQ: No,  I'm saying I'm only addressing ONE CCP policy. Which one?

Common prosperity.


Quote:

Does this policy encompass economics, human rights, democracy and Israel?

In this thread - your fake diversion from the  'foundations' thread -  I'm  addressing the foundations of the  idea of common prosperity.

Which you can't address, because you are blinded by your delusional 'individual rights' ideology.

Deplorable 

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:29pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:23pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 1:35pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:53pm: Dear thegreatdivide , are you now or have you ever been, a member of the communist party? No. Does it still exist in Oz? In any case, I now understand the current economic orthodoxy is the reason for the catastrophic failure to house and employ everyone at above poverty level, in the anglo countries and elsewhere.   Of course it exists. I'm sorry to say that you still got second prize - you were added to the list of cultural Marxists: https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1660808671/1110#1110 How does not being a member of the communist party make me a 'cultural marxist'?

Because you have Marxist tendencies.

You probably voted for homosexual marriage too.  ::)

Quote:

Common prosperity.

Is that the extent of the policy? Just two words?


Quote:

In this thread

What about the forum as a whole? Are you aware of anything you have posted that contradicts CCP policy? Or do I need to start yet another "fake diversion" thread to ask that question?

TGD has shown allegiance to a foreign power.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:47pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:29pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:23pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 1:35pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 20th, 2024 at 12:53pm: Dear thegreatdivide , are you now or have you ever been, a member of the communist party? No. Does it still exist in Oz? In any case, I now understand the current economic orthodoxy is the reason for the catastrophic failure to house and employ everyone at above poverty level, in the anglo countries and elsewhere.   Of course it exists. I'm sorry to say that you still got second prize - you were added to the list of cultural Marxists: https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1660808671/1110#1110 How does not being a member of the communist party make me a 'cultural marxist'? Because you have Marxist tendencies.

Correct - as opposed to your fake 'cultural marxist' tendencies.


Quote:

You probably voted for homosexual marriage too.  ::)

Nope; I agree with Julia Gillard's earlier stance on that topic (before she changed her mind).

Does that get me off your fake list?

freediver wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:49pm:

Is that the extent of the policy? Just two words? What about the forum as a whole? Are you aware of anything you have posted that contradicts CCP policy? Or do I need to start yet another "fake diversion" thread to ask that question?

My interest is in good governance; any similarity with CCP policy is incidental - though as already noted, the Western mainstream political and economic  establishment mocks "common prosperity".  Dullards.

Churchill was correct when he observed: "democracy is the worst form of government" .....but showed total lack of vision when he added "except for all the rest", because he was suffering from the 'individual rights' delusion: morality, justice, and fairness are impossible with naturally competitive, self-interested individuals, unless moderated by good government.

He was in effect saying good governance is beyond the wit of men.

Loser.   

Bobby. wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 3:26pm:

TGD has shown allegiance to a foreign power.

No. I have shown allegiance to to the concept of "common prosperity".

(No wonder you can't see your fake 'cultural Marxism' thread is - fake). :-(

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 2:31pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:26pm: Quote: No, since my posts are almost exclusively concerned with  the concept of "common prosperity" - which your blind "individual rights" ideology renders unattainable because individuals are naturally competitive and self-interested. Are you saying this is the reason why your posts on this forum are indistinguishable from CCP policy? Poor FD's low IQ: No,  I'm saying I'm only addressing ONE CCP policy.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2024 at 9:58am:

any similarity with CCP policy is incidental

Including the fact that the term you use to describe it is straight from CCP propaganda? Just a coincidence? What is the one CCP policy you said you were addressing? Is the meaning that you attach to "common prosperity" the same as the CCP's?

Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy?


Quote:

Churchill was correct when he observed: "democracy is the worst form of government" .....but showed total lack of vision when he added "except for all the rest"

Can you identify a form of government that works better than democracy?

freediver wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2024 at 10:15am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:31pm: freediver wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:26pm: Quote: No, since my posts are almost exclusively concerned with  the concept of "common prosperity" - which your blind "individual rights" ideology renders unattainable because individuals are naturally competitive and self-interested. Are you saying this is the reason why your posts on this forum are indistinguishable from CCP policy? Poor FD's low IQ: No,  I'm saying I'm only addressing ONE CCP policy. Including the fact that the term you use to describe it is straight from CCP propaganda? Just a coincidence?

I'm using the term  because it means the same as 'shared prosperity' (which we all profess to want), indeed the same as 'the common welfare', somewhat ironically and controversially written into the preamble of the US constitution - which has created the most unequal extremes of wealth on the planet. 

Note: Paine was subject to the same confusion re "rights", in the emerging philosphies at the time of the 'enlightenment', when he wrote:

"The world is my country, all men are my brethren, and to do good is my religion

A remarkable statement founded in the concepts of universal morality, justice and fairness, most recently expressed in the UNUDHR. 

But his later  ideas on government are contradictory, because he has fallen for 'the rights of man' delusion, ie as opposed to the right of all men to live in liberty, not slavery or poverty. 


Quote:

What is the one CCP policy you said you were addressing? Is the meaning that you attach to "common prosperity" the same as the CCP's?

Admittedly you are a slow learner - blinded by idoleogy; but don't ask again,  since I have now spelled it out for you above - again. 


Quote:

Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy?

Another dumb question...

Yes;  eg, the CCP, though committed to UN multi-lateralism as opposed to US global hegemony, apparently supports the UNSC veto ......like you - surprise!   


Quote:

Can you identify a form of government that works better than democracy?

At last,  a sensible question.

Yes, 'benevolent meritocratic authority' may work better than blind-leading-the-blind democracy.

Certainly worth a try. True democrats would advise the Chinese government how to achieve good governance under that system, instead of trying to destroy it as part of an attempt to self-interestedly maintain hegemony of "the worst form of government".

As it is, attacks arising from the paranoia and delusions of the current crop of 'democats'  who are ruling the "free" world only encourages insular thinking in the CCP.

We will see; the statements coming out of the recent 'two sessions' conference of leading economists and politicians in Beijing sound good.

If they are realized, the CCP will survive as the world's most successful political party engendering "common prosperty", while more and more 'democracies' implode under increasing inequality and decreasing social cohesion.

   

TGD,

Quote:

If they are realized, the CCP will survive as the world's most successful political party engendering "common prosperty", while more and more 'democracies' implode under increasing inequality and decreasing social cohesion.

The problem is that we don't have true democracy in Australia.

A good example is the mass immigration we see right now.
No one voted for that and it's destroying our society.
It happens because the 2 major parties agreed behind closed doors to
take certain topics off the political agenda.
They make us worry about things like poofter marriage instead -
while the important things get passed in parliament by stealth - covertly.

The Yanks are no different -
my bet is that 90% of the things happening there were never voted on either.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2024 at 10:04am:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 3:26pm: TGD has shown allegiance to a foreign power. No. I have shown allegiance to to the concept of "common prosperity". (No wonder you can't see your fake 'cultural Marxism' thread is - fake). :-(

OK - bring it about ..... Tent City is waiting to get out past the barriers..... first, for you, though - you need to define 'prosperity' and then 'common prosperity'....

Get started..... I haven't got all day to hand feed the slow IQs here ...  **chucks his cheek**  you li'l ol' budding supremacist you... aren't you such a big tough boy ....

Bobby. wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 1:09pm:

TGD, Quote: If they are realized, the CCP will survive as the world's most successful political party engendering "common prosperty", while more and more 'democracies' implode under increasing inequality and decreasing social cohesion. The problem is that we don't have true democracy in Australia. A good example is the mass immigration we see right now. No one voted for that and it's destroying our society. It happens because the 2 major parties agreed behind closed doors to take certain topics off the political agenda. They make us worry about things like poofter marriage instead - while the important things get passed in parliament by stealth - covertly. The Yanks are no different - my bet is that 90% of the things happening there were never voted on either.

Good post.

I proffered to FD an example of an alternative  model for good  governance other than democracy - "the worst form of government" (....according to Churchill, no less).

Can you offer a model for  "true democracy" (your words); social cohesion in the EU's democracies is also imploding under the refugee crises, and the number of democracies in the world is falling,  according to a recent report. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 1:23pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 1:09pm: TGD, Quote: If they are realized, the CCP will survive as the world's most successful political party engendering "common prosperty", while more and more 'democracies' implode under increasing inequality and decreasing social cohesion. The problem is that we don't have true democracy in Australia. A good example is the mass immigration we see right now. No one voted for that and it's destroying our society. It happens because the 2 major parties agreed behind closed doors to take certain topics off the political agenda. They make us worry about things like poofter marriage instead - while the important things get passed in parliament by stealth - covertly. The Yanks are no different - my bet is that 90% of the things happening there were never voted on either. Good post. I proffered to FD an example of an alternative  model for good  governance other than democracy - "the worst form of government" (....according to Churchill, no less). Can you offer a model for  "true democracy" (your words); social cohesion in the EU's democracies is also imploding under the refugee crises, and the number of democracies in the world is falling,  according to a recent report.

The politicians need to go to elections with true lists of what they intend to do.
If it's mass immigration of millions of people
when there is no housing for them - which causes sky rocketing rents and house, unit and flat prices -
they need to tell us first.

The politicians are robbing us of our democracy.
They are traitors to Australia - all of them in the major parties.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 1:09pm:

TGD, Quote: If they are realized, the CCP will survive as the world's most successful political party engendering "common prosperty", while more and more 'democracies' implode under increasing inequality and decreasing social cohesion. The problem is that we don't have true democracy in Australia. A good example is the mass immigration we see right now. No one voted for that and it's destroying our society. It happens because the 2 major parties agreed behind closed doors to take certain topics off the political agenda. They make us worry about things like poofter marriage instead - while the important things get passed in parliament by stealth - covertly. The Yanks are no different - my bet is that 90% of the things happening there were never voted on either.

It's called 'Representative Democracy', Bobby.

If you'd prefer 'Direct Democracy', you'll have to move to Liechtenstein.

Oz is 27% ruled by China's dictators, and two-way trade with China increased 12 per cent in FY2022-23, totalling $316.9 billion. Loss of this will deter immigration, reduce house-investor profiteering and raise the fruit-picker numbers.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 1:51pm:

It's called 'Representative Democracy', Bobby. If you'd prefer 'Direct Democracy', you'll have to move to Liechtenstein.

The politicians need to go to elections with true lists of what they intend to do.
If it's mass immigration of millions of people
when there is no housing for them - which causes sky rocketing rents and house, unit and flat prices -
they need to tell us first.

The politicians are robbing us of our democracy.
They are traitors to Australia - all of them in the major parties.

chimera wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 1:52pm:

Oz is 27% ruled by China's dictators, and two-way trade with China increased 12 per cent in FY2022-23, totalling $316.9 billion. Loss of this will deter immigration, reduce house-investor profiteering and raise the fruit-picker numbers.

But will the loss of iron-ore royalties paid to the Oz government's treasury still enable funding for necessary government programs  (health, age care) ? 

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 1:21pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 23rd, 2024 at 10:04am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 3:26pm: TGD has shown allegiance to a foreign power. No. I have shown allegiance to to the concept of "common prosperity". (No wonder you can't see your fake 'cultural Marxism' thread is - fake). :-( OK - bring it about ..... Tent City is waiting to get out past the barriers..... first, for you, though - you need to define 'prosperity' and then 'common prosperity'....

Common prosperity: absence of poverty (NOT equality of outcome), and housing and jobs for all.

Oz has more than enough resources to achieve it.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:14pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 1:21pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 23rd, 2024 at 10:04am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 3:26pm: TGD has shown allegiance to a foreign power. No. I have shown allegiance to to the concept of "common prosperity". (No wonder you can't see your fake 'cultural Marxism' thread is - fake). :-( OK - bring it about ..... Tent City is waiting to get out past the barriers..... first, for you, though - you need to define 'prosperity' and then 'common prosperity'.... Common prosperity: absence of poverty (NOT equality of outcome), and housing and jobs for all. Oz has more than enough resources to achieve it.

Ah, so - who is more prosperous... Tent Citizen or ocean shores drinking rum every night, free pussy, boat and food and medical treatment flown in beach bum ?  Ardent young student studying medicine to better his people while living in one room walk-up or beach bum wasting away down in Margueritaville?

Ah, so - how you create common prosperity?  How you define?

Next Pascoe move - teach 'em ancient aquaculture on beach living somewhere.... all mod cons provided.... goin' set up an Aboriginal style aquaculture farm and show Whartey how it's done....

What we have here.... is common prosperity for the peasantry - and uncommon prosperity for the self-appointed or arbitrarily appointed betters... which raises the question ....

Does an Abrogator who holds a private hunting preserve - no poachers allowed - live in greater prosperity than a homeless beggar Abrogator living on the East Coast?  The migration to the coast is on with winter coming, you know - ask any seaside town cop .....

Bobby. wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:02pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 1:51pm: It's called 'Representative Democracy', Bobby. If you'd prefer 'Direct Democracy', you'll have to move to Liechtenstein. The politicians need to go to elections with true lists of what they intend to do. If it's mass immigration of millions of people when there is no housing for them - which causes sky rocketing rents and house, unit and flat prices - they need to tell us first. The politicians are robbing us of our democracy. They are traitors to Australia - all of them in the major parties.

Actually, neoclassical economists - serving the interests of financial elites, at the centres of power - are destroying our democracy, via the dogma of the "independent" reserve bank, which takes policy-making out of the hands of elected representatives.

(...allowing Chalmers to claim "we don't control interest rates"....)

Most pollies think they are freely legislating policies, but they are subject to obsolete economic orthodoxy, believing government budgets are subject to the same constraints as household budgets.

That's why it's always a choice between tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum; the government is "broke" whichever party is in office.

But you can't see it, being duped by neoclassical economic orthodoxy.

As is the government, thinking we have to increase the population to increase prosperity - an obvious error, except to 'continuous growth' neoclassical economists. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:11pm:

But will the loss of iron-ore royalties paid to the Oz government's treasury still enable funding for necessary government programs  (health, age care) ?

of course not. why do you ask?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:23pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:14pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 1:21pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 23rd, 2024 at 10:04am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 3:26pm: TGD has shown allegiance to a foreign power. No. I have shown allegiance to to the concept of "common prosperity". (No wonder you can't see your fake 'cultural Marxism' thread is - fake). :-( OK - bring it about ..... Tent City is waiting to get out past the barriers..... first, for you, though - you need to define 'prosperity' and then 'common prosperity'.... Common prosperity: absence of poverty (NOT equality of outcome), and housing and jobs for all. Oz has more than enough resources to achieve it. Ah, so - who is more prosperous...?

Did you miss it? Those with houses and jobs, with their prosperity confirmed by longer life expectancy on average.

chimera wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:36pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:11pm: But will the loss of iron-ore royalties paid to the Oz government's treasury still enable funding for necessary government programs  (health, age care) ?  of course not. why do you ask?

Oz needs China to continue to buy its iron ore at current prices and quantity, to maintain government spending.

chimera wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:36pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:11pm: But will the loss of iron-ore royalties paid to the Oz government's treasury still enable funding for necessary government programs  (health, age care) ?  of course not. why do you ask?

Don't forget Abrogator royalties first... then the dole as well.... gotta pay that rent somehow.... open your eyes...

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:36pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:23pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:14pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 1:21pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 23rd, 2024 at 10:04am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 3:26pm: TGD has shown allegiance to a foreign power. No. I have shown allegiance to to the concept of "common prosperity". (No wonder you can't see your fake 'cultural Marxism' thread is - fake). :-( OK - bring it about ..... Tent City is waiting to get out past the barriers..... first, for you, though - you need to define 'prosperity' and then 'common prosperity'.... Common prosperity: absence of poverty (NOT equality of outcome), and housing and jobs for all. Oz has more than enough resources to achieve it. Ah, so - who is more prosperous...? Did you miss it? Those with houses and jobs, with their prosperity confirmed by longer life expectancy on average.

Ah so - beach bum job and house provided is prosperous.... so medicine student Abrogator living on SA prosperous, too?   :-?  Rent citizenry is a job now?

How you find all these 'jobs'?  Ayers rock, remember - public bought Ayers for the Abrogators, they ran it and had 'jobs' to guarantee their futures' etc.....now it's all failed and they want to sell it for the quick bucks for a big party, Errol - you bring a woman, ay?

Where you find these jobs?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:39pm:

chimera wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:36pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:11pm: But will the loss of iron-ore royalties paid to the Oz government's treasury still enable funding for necessary government programs  (health, age care) ?  of course not. why do you ask? Don't forget Abrogator royalties first... then the dole as well.... gotta pay that rent somehow.... open your eyes...

Those are costs to the government, not revenues. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:43pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:39pm: chimera wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:36pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:11pm: But will the loss of iron-ore royalties paid to the Oz government's treasury still enable funding for necessary government programs  (health, age care) ?  of course not. why do you ask? Don't forget Abrogator royalties first... then the dole as well.... gotta pay that rent somehow.... open your eyes... Those are costs to the government, not revenues.

Strange comment..... whatchu smokin', boy?  Duzzen follow anywhere on from this little sub-strand... got a side-step as wide as the Harbour Bridge, that boy....

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:41pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:36pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:23pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:14pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 1:21pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 23rd, 2024 at 10:04am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 3:26pm: TGD has shown allegiance to a foreign power. No. I have shown allegiance to to the concept of "common prosperity". (No wonder you can't see your fake 'cultural Marxism' thread is - fake). :-( OK - bring it about ..... Tent City is waiting to get out past the barriers..... first, for you, though - you need to define 'prosperity' and then 'common prosperity'.... Common prosperity: absence of poverty (NOT equality of outcome), and housing and jobs for all. Oz has more than enough resources to achieve it. Ah, so - who is more prosperous...? Did you miss it? Those with houses and jobs, with their prosperity confirmed by longer life expectancy on average. Ah so - beach bum job and house provided is prosperous....

No; the gap stats prove your nonsense wrong. 


Quote:

...jobs ....

Are you dementing, or just playing dumb.

I have linked to the Job Guarantee many times; that you don't recognize the value of useful work (outside of the regular job market) is no excuse to remain ignorant. 

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:46pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:43pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:39pm: chimera wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:36pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:11pm: But will the loss of iron-ore royalties paid to the Oz government's treasury still enable funding for necessary government programs  (health, age care) ?  of course not. why do you ask? Don't forget Abrogator royalties first... then the dole as well.... gotta pay that rent somehow.... open your eyes... Those are costs to the government, not revenues.  Strange comment.....

So facts are swept aside as 'strange comments' .... 
The subject was Oz govt. tax royalties received from flogging iron ore to China - govt. revenue. 

You changed it to royalties the govt PAYS black corporations  as compensation for land 'tresspass' by mining companies, etc. - govt. expenditure.   

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:38pm:

Oz needs China to continue to buy its iron ore at current prices and quantity, to maintain government spending.

uhuh..aduh..
so my post was: 'Oz is 27% ruled by China's dictators, and two-way trade with China increased 12 per cent in FY2022-23, totalling $316.9 billion. Loss of this will deter immigration, reduce house-investor profiteering and raise the fruit-picker numbers'.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 2:31pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:02pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 1:51pm: It's called 'Representative Democracy', Bobby. If you'd prefer 'Direct Democracy', you'll have to move to Liechtenstein. The politicians need to go to elections with true lists of what they intend to do. If it's mass immigration of millions of people when there is no housing for them - which causes sky rocketing rents and house, unit and flat prices - they need to tell us first. The politicians are robbing us of our democracy. They are traitors to Australia - all of them in the major parties. Actually, neoclassical economists - serving the interests of financial elites, at the centres of power - are destroying our democracy, via the dogma of the "independent" reserve bank, which takes policy-making out of the hands of elected representatives. (...allowing Chalmers to claim "we don't control interest rates"....) Most pollies think they are freely legislating policies, but they are subject to obsolete economic orthodoxy, believing government budgets are subject to the same constraints as household budgets. That's why it's always a choice between tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum; the government is "broke" whichever party is in office. But you can't see it, being duped by neoclassical economic orthodoxy. As is the government, thinking we have to increase the population to increase prosperity - an obvious error, except to 'continuous growth' neoclassical economists.

Then the RBA should have refused to buy all the Govt Bonds
so the money printing would stop.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 12:53pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 23rd, 2024 at 10:15am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:31pm: freediver wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:26pm: Quote: No, since my posts are almost exclusively concerned with  the concept of "common prosperity" - which your blind "individual rights" ideology renders unattainable because individuals are naturally competitive and self-interested. Are you saying this is the reason why your posts on this forum are indistinguishable from CCP policy? Poor FD's low IQ: No,  I'm saying I'm only addressing ONE CCP policy. Including the fact that the term you use to describe it is straight from CCP propaganda? Just a coincidence? I'm using the term  because it means the same as 'shared prosperity' (which we all profess to want), indeed the same as 'the common welfare', somewhat ironically and controversially written into the preamble of the US constitution - which has created the most unequal extremes of wealth on the planet.  Note: Paine was subject to the same confusion re "rights", in the emerging philosphies at the time of the 'enlightenment', when he wrote: "The world is my country, all men are my brethren, and to do good is my religion A remarkable statement founded in the concepts of universal morality, justice and fairness, most recently expressed in the UNUDHR.  But his later  ideas on government are contradictory, because he has fallen for 'the rights of man' delusion, ie as opposed to the right of all men to live in liberty, not slavery or poverty.  [quote]What is the one CCP policy you said you were addressing? Is the meaning that you attach to "common prosperity" the same as the CCP's?

Admittedly you are a slow learner - blinded by idoleogy; but don't ask again,  since I have now spelled it out for you above - again. 


Quote:

Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy?

Another dumb question...

Yes;  eg, the CCP, though committed to UN multi-lateralism as opposed to US global hegemony, apparently supports the UNSC veto ......like you - surprise!   [/quote]

No you haven't answered it. You are dodging the question. You have merely given three different terms that could mean just about anything.

Do you mean the same thing as the CCP when you say common prosperity?

Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy?

What is the 'one CCP policy' you said you were addressing?

Britain is set to declare China a threat to national security after two malicious cyber campaigns targeting Westminster parliamentarians and Britain’s 40 million voters.

Australia’s Five Eyes spy network supported Britain in identifying China state-affiliated actors as responsible for two malicious cyber campaigns targeting Westminster parliamentarians and Britain’s 40 million voters.

Britain has raised the issue of China’s targeting of British democratic institutions and political processes with the Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and has made public its concerns about China so “other countries should see the detail of threats that our systems and democracies face”.

Oliver Dowden, Britain’s deputy Prime Minister, also indicated the UK would officially declare China a threat, The Times reports.

In an unprecedented joint operation to expose Chinese espionage, London and Washington revealed details of a decade-long campaign by Beijing to “repress critics, compromise government institutions, and steal trade secrets”, The Times reports.


In the UK ministers revealed that China had successfully gained access to a “treasure trove” of personal information in a cyberattack on Britain’s election watchdog and had attempted to spy on MPs critical of Beijing.

chimera wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 3:17pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:38pm: Oz needs China to continue to buy its iron ore at current prices and quantity, to maintain government spending. uhuh..aduh.. so my post was: 'Oz is 27% ruled by China's dictators, and two-way trade with China increased 12 per cent in FY2022-23, totalling $316.9 billion. Loss of this will deter immigration, reduce house-investor profiteering and raise the fruit-picker numbers'.

and also reduce  funding for age care, education, and public housing?

Frank wrote on Mar 26^th, 2024 at 10:19am:

Britain is set to declare China a threat to national security after two malicious cyber campaigns targeting Westminster parliamentarians and Britain’s 40 million voters. Australia’s Five Eyes spy network supported Britain in identifying China state-affiliated actors as responsible for two malicious cyber campaigns targeting Westminster parliamentarians and Britain’s 40 million voters. Britain has raised the issue of China’s targeting of British democratic institutions and political processes with the Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and has made public its concerns about China so “other countries should see the detail of threats that our systems and democracies face”. Oliver Dowden, Britain’s deputy Prime Minister, also indicated the UK would officially declare China a threat, The Times reports. In an unprecedented joint operation to expose Chinese espionage, London and Washington revealed details of a decade-long campaign by Beijing to “repress critics, compromise government institutions, and steal trade secrets”, The Times reports. In the UK ministers revealed that China had successfully gained access to a “treasure trove” of personal information in a cyberattack on Britain’s election watchdog and had attempted to spy on MPs critical of Beijing.

It's mirror time: the 'five eyes' headed by US 'security' spooks are the most egregious cyber actors on the globe.

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2024 at 8:38am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 12:53pm: freediver wrote on Mar 23rd, 2024 at 10:15am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:31pm: freediver wrote on Mar 22nd, 2024 at 2:26pm: Quote: No, since my posts are almost exclusively concerned with  the concept of "common prosperity" - which your blind "individual rights" ideology renders unattainable because individuals are naturally competitive and self-interested. Are you saying this is the reason why your posts on this forum are indistinguishable from CCP policy? Poor FD's low IQ: No,  I'm saying I'm only addressing ONE CCP policy. Including the fact that the term you use to describe it is straight from CCP propaganda? Just a coincidence? I'm using the term  because it means the same as 'shared prosperity' (which we all profess to want), indeed the same as 'the common welfare', somewhat ironically and controversially written into the preamble of the US constitution - which has created the most unequal extremes of wealth on the planet.  Note: Paine was subject to the same confusion re "rights", in the emerging philosphies at the time of the 'enlightenment', when he wrote: "The world is my country, all men are my brethren, and to do good is my religion A remarkable statement founded in the concepts of universal morality, justice and fairness, most recently expressed in the UNUDHR.  But his later  ideas on government are contradictory, because he has fallen for 'the rights of man' delusion, ie as opposed to the right of all men to live in liberty, not slavery or poverty.  [quote]What is the one CCP policy you said you were addressing? Is the meaning that you attach to "common prosperity" the same as the CCP's? Admittedly you are a slow learner - blinded by idoleogy; but don't ask again,  since I have now spelled it out for you above - again.  [quote]Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy?

Another dumb question...

Yes;  eg, the CCP, though committed to UN multi-lateralism as opposed to US global hegemony, apparently supports the UNSC veto ......like you - surprise!   [/quote]

No you haven't answered it. You are dodging the question. You have merely given three different terms that could mean just about anything.

Do you mean the same thing as the CCP when you say common prosperity?[/quote]

Yes.


Quote:

Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy?

Yes  - example given, which YOU agree with! 


Quote:

What is the 'one CCP policy' you said you were addressing?

Have your forgotten already? I'm addressing the particular CCP policy expressed in the term 'common prosperity'.   '

It means no-one living in poverty; the CCP has the centenary of the CCP government in mind (in 2049), for its achievement.

Whereas people will still be unemployed and living in city streets in Oz, if the current neoliberal orthodoxy is still in place.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 24^th, 2024 at 4:59pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:31pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 2:02pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 24th, 2024 at 1:51pm: It's called 'Representative Democracy', Bobby. If you'd prefer 'Direct Democracy', you'll have to move to Liechtenstein. The politicians need to go to elections with true lists of what they intend to do. If it's mass immigration of millions of people when there is no housing for them - which causes sky rocketing rents and house, unit and flat prices - they need to tell us first. The politicians are robbing us of our democracy. They are traitors to Australia - all of them in the major parties. Actually, neoclassical economists - serving the interests of financial elites, at the centres of power - are destroying our democracy, via the dogma of the "independent" reserve bank, which takes policy-making out of the hands of elected representatives. (...allowing Chalmers to claim "we don't control interest rates"....) Most pollies think they are freely legislating policies, but they are subject to obsolete economic orthodoxy, believing government budgets are subject to the same constraints as household budgets. That's why it's always a choice between tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum; the government is "broke" whichever party is in office. But you can't see it, being duped by neoclassical economic orthodoxy. As is the government, thinking we have to increase the population to increase prosperity - an obvious error, except to 'continuous growth' neoclassical economists.  Then the RBA should have refused to buy all the Govt Bonds so the money printing would stop.

You are learning, Bobby.

In fact, the government should not have issued (ie, sold) bonds in the first place, because currency-issuing governments don't NEED to borrow, obviously.

Note: creating money out of thin air is not "money printing", it's changing the (computer) digits in citizens' bank accounts, IF/provided the government can purchase the necessary resources from citizens. 

Spot the difference?   

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26^th, 2024 at 1:47pm:

You are learning, Bobby. In fact, the government should not have issued (ie, sold) bonds in the first place, because currency-issuing governments don't NEED to borrow, obviously. Note: creating money out of thin air is not "money printing", it's changing the (computer) digits in citizens' bank accounts, IF/provided the government can purchase the necessary resources from citizens.  Spot the difference?

Me learning?
I'm the teacher here.

Inflation was caused by the RBA and they never apologised for it.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 26^th, 2024 at 2:04pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26th, 2024 at 1:47pm: You are learning, Bobby. In fact, the government should not have issued (ie, sold) bonds in the first place, because currency-issuing governments don't NEED to borrow, obviously. Note: creating money out of thin air is not "money printing", it's changing the (computer) digits in citizens' bank accounts, IF/provided the government can purchase the necessary resources from citizens.  Spot the difference?    Me learning? I'm the teacher here.

ie the teacher of obsolete economic orthodoxy.


Quote:

Inflation was caused by the RBA and they never apologised for it.

They are merely following the the precepts of neoclassical/neoliberal orthodoxy which YOU support.

Q: how should the govt. have kept locked-down workers alive during the pandemic?

You stopped learning when you abandoned the MMT teachings. 

TGD,
you've go it all wrong.
I don't support - MMT - modern monetary theory.
Govts should never be printing $trillions in excess money.

We printed over $1 trillion.

The Yanks printed over $34 trillion.

The Yanks are printing another $1 trillion every 100 days.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 26^th, 2024 at 2:51pm:

TGD, you've go it all wrong. I don't support - MMT - modern monetary theory. Govts should never be printing $trillions in excess money. We printed over $1 trillion. The Yanks printed over $34 trillion.

Yes, and inflation in both countries is falling.


Quote:

The Yanks are printing another $1 trillion every 100 days.

Yes.....and lo and behold, interest rates and inflation are falling in the US.

The penny will drop in a few years time, when US debt reaches $100 trillion, yet the US economy keeps chugging along.   

But we have a problem when you refuse to answer simple questions: how SHOULD the Oz government have kept locked down workers - who had no income - alive in the pandemic?

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26^th, 2024 at 3:03pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 26th, 2024 at 2:51pm: TGD, you've go it all wrong. I don't support - MMT - modern monetary theory. Govts should never be printing $trillions in excess money. We printed over $1 trillion. The Yanks printed over $34 trillion. Yes, and inflation in both countries is falling. Quote: The Yanks are printing another $1 trillion every 100 days. Yes.....and lo and behold, interest rates and inflation are falling in the US. The penny will drop in a few years time, when US debt reaches $100 trillion, yet the US economy keeps chugging along.    But we have a problem when you refuse to answer simple questions: how SHOULD the Oz government have kept locked down workers - who had no income - alive in the pandemic?

By refusing to go along with lockdowns.
In the long run we would have had fewer deaths -
now we're getting deaths related to the vax itself.   ::)

Bobby. wrote on Mar 26^th, 2024 at 3:41pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26th, 2024 at 3:03pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 26th, 2024 at 2:51pm: TGD, you've go it all wrong. I don't support - MMT - modern monetary theory. Govts should never be printing $trillions in excess money. We printed over $1 trillion. The Yanks printed over $34 trillion. Yes, and inflation in both countries is falling. Quote: The Yanks are printing another $1 trillion every 100 days. Yes.....and lo and behold, interest rates and inflation are falling in the US. The penny will drop in a few years time, when US debt reaches $100 trillion, yet the US economy keeps chugging along.    But we have a problem when you refuse to answer simple questions: how SHOULD the Oz government have kept locked down workers - who had no income - alive in the pandemic? By refusing to go along with lockdowns. In the long run we would have had fewer deaths - now we're getting deaths related to the vax itself.   ::)

In the long run...with nursing homes residents all dead, and a lot of formerly healthy functioning people dead as as well, before vaccines saved most of us. 

Remember, Trump himself would be dead if it wasn't for a vaccine; it was touch and go for a while (and he got very sick).   

I'll ask again: how should government keep wageless,  locked-down (non-essential) workers alive, in a real pandemic - not a 'dud' like covid- 19? 

TGD - you're making up hypotheticals.

forgiven

namaste


╰დ╮ॐ╭დ╯

Keeping people alive? Isn't that setting the bar a bit high for the CCP?

freediver wrote on Mar 27^th, 2024 at 3:26pm:

Keeping people alive? Isn't that setting the bar a bit high for the CCP?

(google)

Chinese life expectancy 1960 to 2024: increased from 50 to 79 years

US over the same period: increased from 69 to 79 years. 

(India: 45 to 69 years).   

Bobby. wrote on Mar 27^th, 2024 at 3:25pm:

TGD - you're making up hypotheticals. forgiven namaste ╰დ╮ॐ╭დ╯

Because you are deluded by the government as household metaphor. 

Currency-issuing government doesn't NEED to borrow...

(Lovely scrolls; Bach was fond of creating similar alongside his scores).

The CCP starved 50 million Chinese people to death by trying to feed them all equally.

They deliberately suppressed information about the initial covid virus outbreak in the lead up to Chinese new year, when Chinese people travel a lot, resulting in a massive spread of the disease when they should have been trying to slow the spread. Again, massive loss of life, this time not just restricted to China.

So yeah, keeping people alive is not exactly one of the CCP's strengths.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26^th, 2024 at 1:36pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 25th, 2024 at 8:38am: Do you mean the same thing as the CCP when you say common prosperity? Yes. Quote: Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy? Yes  - example given, which YOU agree with!

What was the example?


Quote:

[quote]What is the 'one CCP policy' you said you were addressing?

Have your forgotten already? I'm addressing the particular CCP policy expressed in the term 'common prosperity'.   '

It means no-one living in poverty; the CCP has the centenary of the CCP government in mind (in 2049), for its achievement.

Whereas people will still be unemployed and living in city streets in Oz, if the current neoliberal orthodoxy is still in place. [/quote]

That is a goal, not a policy. Unless you think the CCP policy is to predict the future and cross their fingers?

freediver wrote on Mar 27^th, 2024 at 4:17pm:

The CCP starved 50 million Chinese people to death by trying to feed them all equally.

Wrong again: with the intention to lift eveyone from serfdom to food security in an industrialized society.

Marx stated the goal, but did not address the method,  for a pre-industrial subsistence-agriculture economy.

Note for poor ideologically-blind FD:  food security for all is NOT "trying to feed everyone equally" - the Right's  fake 'equality of outcome' narrative.


Quote:

They deliberately suppressed information about the initial covid virus outbreak in the lead up to Chinese new year, when Chinese people travel a lot, resulting in a massive spread of the disease when they should have been trying to slow the spread. Again, massive loss of life, this time not just restricted to China.

That's not progaganda - you are changing the topic (!); but no doubt there was considerable panic afoot at the time which they wanted to keep under wraps.

Ever heard of FOI controversies here at home?
Causes considerable strife at times.   


Quote:

So yeah, keeping people alive is not exactly one of the CCP's strengths.

Check the CCP's success in increasing Chinese life expectancy since 1960, cf. the US. 

freediver wrote on Mar 27^th, 2024 at 4:17pm:

The CCP starved 50 million Chinese people to death by trying to feed them all equally. They deliberately suppressed information about the initial covid virus outbreak in the lead up to Chinese new year, when Chinese people travel a lot, resulting in a massive spread of the disease when they should have been trying to slow the spread. Again, massive loss of life, this time not just restricted to China. So yeah, keeping people alive is not exactly one of the CCP's strengths.

Mere admin errors.

freediver wrote on Mar 27^th, 2024 at 4:18pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26th, 2024 at 1:36pm: freediver wrote on Mar 25th, 2024 at 8:38am: Do you mean the same thing as the CCP when you say common prosperity? Yes. Quote: Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy? Yes  - example given, which YOU agree with!  What was the example?  CCP view of UNSC veto (that it should exist); do try to read posts before replying.  [quote]What is the 'one CCP policy' you said you were addressing? (Common prosperity)  is a goal, not a policy. Unless you think the CCP policy is to predict the future and cross their fingers?

The policies - to achieve the goal - are outlined in the five year plans.

You have no policies to achieve that goal in Oz. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 27^th, 2024 at 4:44pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 27th, 2024 at 4:18pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26th, 2024 at 1:36pm: freediver wrote on Mar 25th, 2024 at 8:38am: Do you mean the same thing as the CCP when you say common prosperity? Yes. Quote: Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy? Yes  - example given, which YOU agree with!  What was the example?  CCP view of UNSC veto (that it should exist); do try to read posts before replying.  [quote]What is the 'one CCP policy' you said you were addressing? (Common prosperity)  is a goal, not a policy. Unless you think the CCP policy is to predict the future and cross their fingers? The policies - to achieve the goal - are outlined in the five year plans. You have no policies to achieve that goal in Oz.

Nor do we make 'administrative errors' that starve 40 million people to death while trying to raise their life expectancy....

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 27^th, 2024 at 4:44pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 27th, 2024 at 4:18pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26th, 2024 at 1:36pm: freediver wrote on Mar 25th, 2024 at 8:38am: Do you mean the same thing as the CCP when you say common prosperity? Yes. Quote: Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy? Yes  - example given, which YOU agree with!  What was the example?  CCP view of UNSC veto (that it should exist); do try to read posts before replying.  [quote]What is the 'one CCP policy' you said you were addressing? (Common prosperity)  is a goal, not a policy. Unless you think the CCP policy is to predict the future and cross their fingers? The policies - to achieve the goal - are outlined in the five year plans. You have no policies to achieve that goal in Oz.

So the "one CCP policy" you were addressing is actually several of their 5 year plans?

What views have you posted on the UNSC veto, and how do they differ from the CCP's?

Frank wrote on Mar 27^th, 2024 at 4:54pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 27th, 2024 at 4:44pm: freediver wrote on Mar 27th, 2024 at 4:18pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26th, 2024 at 1:36pm: freediver wrote on Mar 25th, 2024 at 8:38am: Do you mean the same thing as the CCP when you say common prosperity? Yes. Quote: Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy? Yes  - example given, which YOU agree with!  What was the example?  CCP view of UNSC veto (that it should exist); do try to read posts before replying.  [quote]What is the 'one CCP policy' you said you were addressing? (Common prosperity)  is a goal, not a policy. Unless you think the CCP policy is to predict the future and cross their fingers? The policies - to achieve the goal - are outlined in the five year plans. You have no policies to achieve that goal in Oz.  Nor do we make 'administrative errors' that starve 40 million people to death while trying to raise their life expectancy....

Nor will the modern CCP - since the 'opening up' in 1980 -  make that error.

Meanwhile your neoliberal government - blinded by market ideology -  can't even engender a functioning community in the centre of Oz.

freediver wrote on Mar 27^th, 2024 at 5:25pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 27th, 2024 at 4:44pm: freediver wrote on Mar 27th, 2024 at 4:18pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26th, 2024 at 1:36pm: freediver wrote on Mar 25th, 2024 at 8:38am: Do you mean the same thing as the CCP when you say common prosperity? Yes. Quote: Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy? Yes  - example given, which YOU agree with!  What was the example?  CCP view of UNSC veto (that it should exist); do try to read posts before replying.  [quote]What is the 'one CCP policy' you said you were addressing? (Common prosperity)  is a goal, not a policy. Unless you think the CCP policy is to predict the future and cross their fingers? The policies - to achieve the goal - are outlined in the five year plans. You have no policies to achieve that goal in Oz.  So the "one CCP policy" you were addressing is actually several of their 5 year plans?

So we might be able to nail this down: 

The CCP has "common prosperity" as a goal.

I have "common prosperity" as a goal.

The West - blinded by its free market ideology - doesn't have "common prosperity" as a goal.

["The markets make good servants but bad masters, and a worse religion": Amory Lovins.] 

As to policies  to achieve "common prosperity", I like MMT, and I'm pleased to see a former PBofC executive (who spoke at the recent '2 sessions' in Beijing)  is also aware of MMT, as a tool to avoid a Japanese-style deflationary 'lost decades' episode (after their 1990  real-estate  crash).


Quote:

What views have you posted on the UNSC veto, and how do they differ from the CCP's?

That the veto should be scrapped, as per Doc Evatt's original plan for the proposed UNSC, in 1946. (Evatt was a former Oz High Court judge, active in the creation of the UN).

The CCP rejects the West's (and your) "shared belief" in the 'rules based order', when the rules are based on your 'natural individual rights'** delusion. Hence the CCP might want to retain its UNSC veto.

**'Natural'...meaning 'self-evident' (as graps pointed out); but delusions aren't self-evident for the deluded.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 28^th, 2024 at 5:07pm:

The CCP has "common prosperity" as a goal. I have "common prosperity" as a goal. The West - blinded by its free market ideology - doesn't have "common prosperity" as a goal. ["The markets make good servants but bad masters, and a worse religion": Amory Lovins.]

So, the CCP's pouring 'free' money into anything leads to common prosperity, eh!

Free, until it's clawed back by raiding ordinary people's savings accounts without warning or recompense.

Quote:

That the veto should be scrapped, as per Doc Evatt's original plan for the proposed UNSC, in 1946. (Evatt was a former Oz High Court judge, active in the creation of the UN). The CCP rejects the West's (and your) "shared belief" in the 'rules based order', when the rules are based on your 'natural individual rights'** delusion. Hence the CCP might want to retain its UNSC veto.

So the only view you have posted here that is contrary to CCP policy is one you haven't actually posted here previously, and you are not sure if it is contrary to CCP policy?


Quote:

The CCP has "common prosperity" as a goal. I have "common prosperity" as a goal. The West - blinded by its free market ideology - doesn't have "common prosperity" as a goal.

I expect everyone would accept that as a goal. By itself, it doesn't mean much. Most of what you say doesn't mean much. You post the spin that the CCP puts on it's policies, but seem ignorant of any detail or understanding.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 28^th, 2024 at 5:34pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 28th, 2024 at 5:07pm: The CCP has "common prosperity" as a goal. I have "common prosperity" as a goal. The West - blinded by its free market ideology - doesn't have "common prosperity" as a goal. ["The markets make good servants but bad masters, and a worse religion": Amory Lovins.]  So, the CCP's pouring 'free' money into anything leads to common prosperity, eh!

No. The CCP is not issuing debt free government money (but it should be, to avoid deflation).


Quote:

Free, until it's clawed back by raiding ordinary people's savings accounts without warning or recompense.

See above.

And you don't  understand MMT.

No excuse,  there are pages explaining it on this board. 

freediver wrote on Mar 28^th, 2024 at 5:36pm:

Quote: That the veto should be scrapped, as per Doc Evatt's original plan for the proposed UNSC, in 1946. (Evatt was a former Oz High Court judge, active in the creation of the UN). The CCP rejects the West's (and your) "shared belief" in the 'rules based order', when the rules are based on your 'natural individual rights'** delusion. Hence the CCP might want to retain its UNSC veto. So the only view you have posted here that is contrary to CCP policy is one you haven't actually posted here previously, and you are not sure if it is contrary to CCP policy?

Correct (I'll take your word for all of that).  Problem?


Quote:

I expect everyone would accept (Common prosperity)  as a goal.

"You expect"?  You obviously aren't aware of the debates among economists, many of whom  poor scorn on  the concept:  after all, you have to increase unemployment to kill inflation, right?..... just ask Bullock.


Quote:

By itself, it doesn't mean much.

You mean, without the policies needed to achieve it, - which I discussed in my post...... 


Quote:

Most of what you say doesn't mean much. You post the spin that the CCP puts on it's policies, but seem ignorant of any detail or understanding.

Refuted above.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 28^th, 2024 at 4:47pm:

Frank wrote on Mar 27th, 2024 at 4:54pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 27th, 2024 at 4:44pm: freediver wrote on Mar 27th, 2024 at 4:18pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26th, 2024 at 1:36pm: freediver wrote on Mar 25th, 2024 at 8:38am: Do you mean the same thing as the CCP when you say common prosperity? Yes. Quote: Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy? Yes  - example given, which YOU agree with!  What was the example?  CCP view of UNSC veto (that it should exist); do try to read posts before replying.  [quote]What is the 'one CCP policy' you said you were addressing? (Common prosperity)  is a goal, not a policy. Unless you think the CCP policy is to predict the future and cross their fingers? The policies - to achieve the goal - are outlined in the five year plans. You have no policies to achieve that goal in Oz.  Nor do we make 'administrative errors' that starve 40 million people to death while trying to raise their life expectancy.... Nor will the modern CCP - since the 'opening up' in 1980 -  make that error. Meanwhile your neoliberal government - blinded by market ideology -  can't even engender a functioning community in the centre of Oz.

So what changed in China? The old monster died. Then


At the Fifth Plenum held in 1980, Peng Zhen, He Long and other leaders who had been purged during the Cultural Revolution were rehabilitated. Hu Yaobang became head of the party secretariat as its secretary-general. In September, Hua Guofeng resigned and Zhao Ziyang, another Deng ally, was named premier. Hua remained on the Central Military Commission, but formal power was transferred to a new generation of pragmatic reformers, who reversed Cultural Revolution policies to a large extent. Within a few years, Deng and Hu helped rehabilitate over 3 million "unjust, false, erroneous" cases.[74] In particular, the trial of the Gang of Four took place in Beijing from 1980 to 1981, and the court stated that 729,511 people had been persecuted by the Gang, of whom 34,800 were said to have died.[75]

In 1981, the Chinese Communist Party passed a resolution and declared that the Cultural Revolution was "responsible for the most severe setback and the heaviest losses suffered by the Party, the country, and the people since the founding of the People's Republic

One massive 'administrative error', eh? Millions dead. Oopsa daisy!



As for Alice - the CCP can't get the sons of Mohammed go along with the Xi Ping Pong wheeze so they are locked up in prison camps. Should we treat the Abot as the Chinese treat their Uyghurs? Reeducation camps = well paid jobs for Abos. Full employment of slave labour.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 28^th, 2024 at 5:53pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 28th, 2024 at 5:36pm: Quote: That the veto should be scrapped, as per Doc Evatt's original plan for the proposed UNSC, in 1946. (Evatt was a former Oz High Court judge, active in the creation of the UN). The CCP rejects the West's (and your) "shared belief" in the 'rules based order', when the rules are based on your 'natural individual rights'** delusion. Hence the CCP might want to retain its UNSC veto. So the only view you have posted here that is contrary to CCP policy is one you haven't actually posted here previously, and you are not sure if it is contrary to CCP policy? Correct (I'll take your word for all of that).  Problem? [quote]I expect everyone would accept (Common prosperity)  as a goal.

"You expect"?  You obviously aren't aware of the debates among economists, many of whom  poor scorn on  the concept:  after all, you have to increase unemployment to kill inflation, right?..... just ask Bullock.


Quote:

By itself, it doesn't mean much.

You mean, without the policies needed to achieve it, - which I discussed in my post...... 


Quote:

Most of what you say doesn't mean much. You post the spin that the CCP puts on it's policies, but seem ignorant of any detail or understanding.

Refuted above.
[/quote]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yCV8UYYew8&t=1345s

At 22:25

"The whole [CCP] system's a badly run Enron"

Quote:

Correct (I'll take your word for all of that).  Problem?

When I asked if you were aware of anything you had posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy, I meant something you had actually posted on this forum and which actually contradicted CCP policy.


Quote:

"You expect"?  You obviously aren't aware of the debates among economists, many of whom  poor scorn on  the concept

They poor scorn on a different concept. Either that, or you have misunderstood mainstream macroeconomics. I can't tell which. Economics is not about what political goals people have, but the reality of what they do with their money.


Quote:

You mean, without the policies needed to achieve it, - which I discussed in my post......

You mentioned MMT, which you claim to support and which you also claim to CCP is "aware" of. Is that it?

freediver wrote on Mar 28^th, 2024 at 6:33pm:

Quote: Correct (I'll take your word for all of that).  Problem? When I asked if you were aware of anything you had posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy, I meant something you had actually posted on this forum and which actually contradicted CCP policy.

Er.... my urging to abolish the UNSC veto has been one of my most frequently referred-to  subjects, on this board.

As to the CCP's views, I'm quessing they want to retain China's veto, for reasons already explained (ie the West's fake, delusional 'rules-based order' based on indivdual rights which don't exist in reality).   


Quote:

They poor scorn on a different concept. Either that, or you have misunderstood mainstream macroeconomics. I can't tell which. Economics is not about what political goals people have, but the reality of what they do with their money.

Classic conservative fallacy of composition, caused by claiming the individual is the community.  What individuals do with their money will not teach us how the macroeconomy works.

eg, as Keynes noted during the GD: if everyone decides to be frugal at the same time, the macro-economy will worsen.
I accept your concession.....


Quote:

You mentioned MMT, which you claim to support and which you also claim to CCP is "aware" of.

Correct.


Quote:

Is that it?

Is that what, exactly?

Quote:

As to the CCP's views, I'm quessing they want to retain China's veto

Are you aware of anything else you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy?

I expect the CCP would happily give up their veto if it meant the other veto powers were abolished. The more China can do to make the UN ineffective, the better for them. Obviously they would be happy to have the only veto in the UN.


Quote:

Classic conservative fallacy of composition, caused by claiming the individual is the community.  What individuals do with their money will not teach us how the macroeconomy works. eg, as Keynes noted during the GD: if everyone decides to be frugal at the same time, the macro-economy will worsen. I accept your concession.....

I did not claim the individual is the community. When I talked about what people do with their money, why would you interpret that as excluding macroeconomic trends?


Quote:

Is that what, exactly?

You said you discussed the policies needed to achieve "common prosperity", in the context of you agreeing with CCP policies. Is this limited to you claiming to support MMT and claiming the CCP is aware of it?

Frank wrote on Mar 28^th, 2024 at 6:02pm:

In 1981, the Chinese Communist Party passed a resolution and declared that the Cultural Revolution was "responsible for the most severe setback and the heaviest losses suffered by the Party, the country, and the people since the founding of the People's Republic

 

Obviously a party capable of self examination, unlike deluded 'natural invidual rights' ideologues. 


Quote:

One massive 'administrative error', eh? Millions dead. Oopsa daisy!

Yes - as addressed by the CCP.



Quote:

As for Alice - the CCP....

Er - the CCP aren't the (mal-) administrators in the Alice....


Quote:

can't get the sons of Mohammed go along with the Xi Ping Pong wheeze so they are locked up in prison camps.

Separatism is an issue for national sovereignty; ask the Scots (and Westminster). 



Quote:

Should we treat the Abot as the Chinese treat their Uyghurs? Reeducation camps = well paid jobs for Abos. Full employment of slave labour.

Increasing living standards is a good; remaining mired in separatist, culture-based violence and poverty is not. 

freediver wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 9:07am:

You said you discussed the policies needed to achieve "common prosperity", in the context of you agreeing with CCP policies. Is this limited to you claiming to support MMT and claiming the CCP is aware of it?

He posts what he's instructed to post.

You'll have to ask his handler.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 28^th, 2024 at 5:44pm:

And you don't  understand MMT. No excuse,  there are pages explaining it on this board.

Neither this thread nor your post is about MMT, so... send feedback to your handler that he's out of sync with the conversation... Y'know, like he was twice with the American Revolution and the War of 1812.

freediver wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 9:07am:

Are you aware of anything else you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy?

Other than the concept of "common prosperity" (and the UNSC veto)?

No.  Do feel free to show us otherwise.


Quote:

I expect the CCP would happily give up their veto if it meant the other veto powers were abolished. The more China can do to make the UN ineffective, the better for them. Obviously they would be happy to have the only veto in the UN.

 

An exceptionally confused paragraph, even from you.

1. If UNSC veto powers were abolished , that would include the veto of all five veto-wielding UNSC nations.

2. Abolition of the veto means the UNSC would speak with one voice, just as the High Courts of each nation in the UN  speak with one voice (determined by the majority vote of the justices in each national High Court).

Nothing to do with "China making the UN ineffective; the UN is ALREADY ineffective BECAUSE of the veto. 


Quote:

I did not claim the individual is the community. When I talked about what people do with their money, why would you interpret that as excluding macroeconomic trends?

Because microeconomics (eg what individuals  do with their money) -  masquerading as macro economics - is in fact the reason for the delusions of mainstream neoclassical orthodox  economists.

See #757 in the MMT thread:

https://profstevekeen.substack.com/p/the-magnificent-failure-of-mainstream?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=872467&post_id=141992489&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=rzu3p&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

The Magnificent Failure of Mainstream Economics


Quote:

You said you discussed the policies needed to achieve "common prosperity", in the context of you agreeing with CCP policies. Is this limited to you claiming to support MMT and claiming the CCP is aware of it?

Yes.

Quote:

Other than the concept of "common prosperity" (and the UNSC veto)? No.  Do feel free to show us otherwise.

Are you saying that your common prosperity stuff contradicts CCP policy?


Quote:

Nothing to do with "China making the UN ineffective; the UN is ALREADY ineffective BECAUSE of the veto.

It would make it easier for China to influence the UN by bullying smaller nations.


Quote:

Because microeconomics (eg what individuals  do with their money) -  masquerading as macro economics - is in fact the reason for the delusions of mainstream neoclassical orthodox  economists.

Are you claiming you deliberately misrepresented what I posted because of this?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 9:13am:

freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:07am: You said you discussed the policies needed to achieve "common prosperity", in the context of you agreeing with CCP policies. Is this limited to you claiming to support MMT and claiming the CCP is aware of it? He posts what he's instructed to post. You'll have to ask his handler.

Er... you might observe, I don't have time to consult a " handler". 

But you certainly need to consult someone who can think and debate the issues at hand.

Mainland Chinese are known for their general ignorance of anywhere outside their province and also their incapacity for original thought - they revert to mangled 'legalese' to compensate for it - which includes repeating formal- or legal-sounding terms ad nauseam.

It's one of the many ways a poster can be sure he's dealing with a CCP goon.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 9:51am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:13am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:07am: You said you discussed the policies needed to achieve "common prosperity", in the context of you agreeing with CCP policies. Is this limited to you claiming to support MMT and claiming the CCP is aware of it? He posts what he's instructed to post. You'll have to ask his handler. Er... you might observe, I don't have time to consult a " handler".  But you certainly need to consult someone who can think and debate the issues at hand.

Mainland Chinese do not care if the response is relevant, so long as it parrots formal- or legal-sounding terms, so responses can be generated fast - cha bu duo style.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 9:17am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 28th, 2024 at 5:44pm: And you don't  understand MMT. No excuse,  there are pages explaining it on this board.  Neither this thread nor your post is about MMT, so... send feedback to your handler that he's out of sync with the conversation... Y'know, like he was twice with the American Revolution and the War of 1812.

Er....poor Meister, "common prosperity"  (CCP "propaganda", according to FD)  IS about macro-economics, and MMT is a school of macroeconomics.

Do try to keep up.

Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 9:56am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:17am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 28th, 2024 at 5:44pm: And you don't  understand MMT. No excuse,  there are pages explaining it on this board.  Neither this thread nor your post is about MMT, so... send feedback to your handler that he's out of sync with the conversation... Y'know, like he was twice with the American Revolution and the War of 1812. Er....poor Meister, "common prosperity"  (CCP "propaganda", according to FD)  IS about macro-economics, and MMT is a school of macroeconomics. Do try to keep up.

Common prosperity is a generic term, not one exclusive to any political or economic theory.

You'll need to understand English beyond high-school level to comprehend that.

We in the West are immune to mangled legalese,

freediver wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 9:58am:

Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen.

And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer,

freediver wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 9:51am:

Quote: Other than the concept of "common prosperity" (and the UNSC veto)? No.  Do feel free to show us otherwise. Are you saying that your common prosperity stuff contradicts CCP policy?

No.


Quote:

It would make it easier for China to influence the UN by bullying smaller nations.

Er... China would have only one vote,  in a UNSC without veto. But certainly, your fake rules based order   ie based  on your 'natural individual rights' delusions would more likely be exposed in the UNGA, if the UNSC was forced to speak with one voice.


Quote:

Are you claiming you deliberately misrepresented what I posted because of this?

 

No.

I'm claiming you don't understand how the macroeconomy works, as explained by Prof. Keen in the linked article.   

freediver wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 9:58am:

Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen.

Er...adoption of  free market principles  in China - a formerly planned economy, is not micro-economics.

But China is now facing the limitations of free market ideology - as based on erroneous Western neoclassical  economics masquerading as macroeconomics (eg see the private-sector real-estate Evergrande collapse).   

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:11am:

But China is now facing the limitations of free market ideology - as based on erroneous Western neoclassical  economics masquerading as macroeconomics (eg see the private-sector real-estate Evergrande collapse).

Free market, you say!

The CCP almost exclusively limited ordinary Chinese to investing only in real estate.

Quote:

I'm claiming you don't understand how the macroeconomy works, as explained by Prof. Keen in the linked article.

Prof Keen wrote an article about my understanding of macroeconomics?


Quote:

Er...adoption of  free market principles  in China - a formerly planned economy, is not micro-economics.

Yes it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

In microeconomics, supply and demand is an economic model of price determination in a market. It postulates that, holding all else equal, in a competitive market....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microeconomics

Microeconomics shows conditions under which free markets lead to desirable allocations.

So, what is their strategy? What do they want?

They want to have everybody in the world pay rent to the Chinese Empire. They want to control the key technologies, the finance and the logistics, and make everyone dependent on them. Basically, make everyone else a tenant farmer.

How far have they gotten so far on this road?

Well, it’s very preliminary, because basically what China wants to do is to transform other countries the way they transformed themselves. This is not easy to do. You have political obstacles, cultural obstacles. For example, in a country like Pakistan, where they’ve invested enormously, you have 50% illiteracy and a great deal of political instability, massive infrastructure deficits. No one is going to make Pakistan look like China anytime soon. A country like Brazil, for example, where China is building a national broadband network — that’s a candidate. The whole of Southeast Asia — Vietnam, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand — these are candidates to be transformed into economic adjuncts of the Chinese Empire. If you include Indonesia, Southeast Asia is already 600 million people.

Once the Chinese achieve their goal, would they press their “tenant farmers” politically and ideologically?

I think the Chinese are not curious about how the barbarians govern themselves as long as they’re subordinate to China, economically and technologically. The Chinese are the least ideological people in the world and the most pragmatic.

A lot of my American friends say the problem is the wicked Chinese Communist Party which is oppressing the good Chinese people. I think that’s complete nonsense. I see the Communist Party as simply another manifestation of the Mandarin administrative cast which has ruled China since it was unified in the third century BC.
https://asiatimes.com/2019/10/you-can-never-be-chinas-friend-spengler/

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:02am:

freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer,

Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ...

China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.   

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:15am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:11am: But China is now facing the limitations of free market ideology - as based on erroneous Western neoclassical  economics masquerading as macroeconomics (eg see the private-sector real-estate Evergrande collapse).    Free market, you say! The CCP almost exclusively limited ordinary Chinese to investing only in real estate.

Free market principles, as in "changing from capitalism to communism" - FD's words. Do try to keep up. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:17am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.

China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:17am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.

And just like the MGs with their endless issues, the others will be built in the same cha bu duo style - cutting corners, bits missing, wheels falling off, to save time, allowing them to export as many cheap, flashy-painted chicken-coops-on-wheels as possible.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:20am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:15am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:11am: But China is now facing the limitations of free market ideology - as based on erroneous Western neoclassical  economics masquerading as macroeconomics (eg see the private-sector real-estate Evergrande collapse).    Free market, you say! The CCP almost exclusively limited ordinary Chinese to investing only in real estate. Free market principles, as in "changing from capitalism to communism" - FD's words. Do try to keep up.

The CCP limited the free market by only allowing the people to invest in real estate. Where they were allowed to invest in other things, they soon learned that the CCP would meddle in the market, collapsing the value of the investment.

freediver wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:15am:

Prof Keen wrote an article about my understanding of macroeconomics?

 

Yes; or to be more exact, the erronoeous mainstream  neoclassical eonomic orthodoxy, to which you blindly adhere.


Quote:

Yes it is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand In microeconomics, supply and demand is an economic model of price determination in a market. It postulates that, holding all else equal, in a competitive market.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microeconomics Microeconomics shows conditions under which free markets lead to desirable allocations.

Did you miss it? I said micro-economics masquerading as macro-economics, is the reason for the failure of orthodox mainstream macroeconomics, which is what Prof. Keen is at pains to demonstrate.   

What, in your view, is the biggest misconception about China in the West?

The single biggest misconception is that you have a wicked government and a good people. The Chinese have had 3,000 years for the government and the people to shape each other. The institution in the West that most closely resembles the Chinese system is, in fact, the Sicilian mafia. You have a capo di tutti capi who prevents the other capi from killing each other. Because they’re natural anarchists, they don’t like any form of government. They’re loyal to their families. The emperor is nothing but a necessary evil. The idea of public trust and subsidiarity that’s fundamental to democracy is unknown to the Chinese.

What holds a country of anarchists together, if not the emperor?

There’s an old joke about [former American President] Eisenhower and [former Israeli Prime Minister] Ben Gurion from the 1950’s. Eisenhower tells Ben Gurion, “It’s hard to be president to 200 million Americans.” And Ben Gurion says, “It’s even harder to be prime minister of 2 million prime ministers.”

Well, China is a country of 1.4 billion emperors. Everyone wants to be an emperor. Everyone strives for his own and his family’s power. There’s no sense of Res publica. Certainly no Augustinian sense of common love to hold a country together. What holds the country together is ambition. Therefore, it’s critical that the meritocracy be fair.

Xi Jinping’s daughter goes to Harvard, but no Chinese president can get his child into Peking University unless she gets the right score on the gaokao, the university entrance exam.

So, all hope is not lost for the West when the Chinese ‘capo di tutti capi’ is educating his offspring in one of America’s Ivy League schools?

Well, the one thing that we’re much better at than the Chinese is innovation. As I mentioned, Huawei is very much dependent on Western employees for innovation. I’m not saying the Chinese can’t innovate. During the Tang dynasty (618 to 906 A.D.), which is considered a golden age of Chinese arts and culture, the Chinese invented the clock, the compass, gunpowder, printing and, virtually, all of the elements of the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. However, the Chinese form of meritocracy, which is based on standardized exams, is the second-best way of running that meritocracy. Albert Einstein, who sat in the Swiss patent office because he couldn’t get a university job …

… and then invented the theory of relativity at his private home …

Right. This is unimaginable in China. If you ask the Chinese what worries them the most, many will say, “How come we have no Nobel prizes?” Eight Chinese have won the Nobel prize in sciences, but they are all Chinese who lived in America.

The Chinese system is very bad at identifying those eccentrics, like an Einstein, who make fundamental contributions. We are much better at that. The Western idea of the divine spark in the individual simply doesn’t exist in China. So, I think we do have a chance against the Chinese.

freediver wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:21am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:17am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.    China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion.

And the US, the world's richest economy,  is 330 million.

Who outside the US buys US cars these days? ...which is is why Detroit was devastated by global competition. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:34am:

freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:21am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:17am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.    China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion. And the US, the world's richest economy,  is 330 million. Who outside the US buys US cars these days? ...which is is why Detroit was devastated by global competition.

Do you think it makes you look a bit silly boasting about how China has just overtaken a country that is less than 1/10th it's size?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:27am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:20am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:15am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:11am: But China is now facing the limitations of free market ideology - as based on erroneous Western neoclassical  economics masquerading as macroeconomics (eg see the private-sector real-estate Evergrande collapse).    Free market, you say! The CCP almost exclusively limited ordinary Chinese to investing only in real estate. Free market principles, as in "changing from capitalism to communism" - FD's words. Do try to keep up.  The CCP limited the free market by only allowing the people to invest in real estate. Where they were allowed to invest in other things, they soon learned that the CCP would meddle in the market, collapsing the value of the investment.

More obviously false narrative: private chinese companies in IT, PVs, EVs are among the largest in the world.

freediver wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:37am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:34am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:21am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:17am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.    China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion. And the US, the world's richest economy,  is 330 million. Who outside the US buys US cars these days? ...which is is why Detroit was devastated by global competition.  Do you think it makes you look a bit silly boasting about how China has just overtaken a country that is less than 1/10th it's size?

No, China also overtook the US in car exports; just as Japan (a third of the US pop) did in the 80s.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:34am:

freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:21am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:17am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.    China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion. And the US, the world's richest economy,  is 330 million. Who outside the US buys US cars these days? ...which is is why Detroit was devastated by global competition.

In 2022, cars were the world's 5th most traded product (out of 1,218). In 2022, the top exporters of Cars were Germany ($149B), Japan ($89B), United States ($57.5B), South Korea ($52.1B), and Mexico ($48.4B).

The main destinations of United States exports of cars were Canada ($16.9B), Germany ($6.75B), China ($5.73B), South Korea ($3.81B), and Mexico ($3.35B).

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:38am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:27am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:20am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:15am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:11am: But China is now facing the limitations of free market ideology - as based on erroneous Western neoclassical  economics masquerading as macroeconomics (eg see the private-sector real-estate Evergrande collapse).    Free market, you say! The CCP almost exclusively limited ordinary Chinese to investing only in real estate. Free market principles, as in "changing from capitalism to communism" - FD's words. Do try to keep up.  The CCP limited the free market by only allowing the people to invest in real estate. Where they were allowed to invest in other things, they soon learned that the CCP would meddle in the market, collapsing the value of the investment. More obviously false narrative: private chinese companies in IT, PVs, EVs are among the largest in the world.

Tell that to Jack Ma and the investors in his companies.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:40am:

freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:37am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:34am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:21am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:17am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.    China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion. And the US, the world's richest economy,  is 330 million. Who outside the US buys US cars these days? ...which is is why Detroit was devastated by global competition.  Do you think it makes you look a bit silly boasting about how China has just overtaken a country that is less than 1/10th it's size? No, China also overtook the US in car exports; just as Japan (a third of the US pop) did in the 80s.

So boasting about China overtaking a country that is 1/10th it's size does not make you look silly because the Japanese managed to overtake a country that was 3X bigger?

Frank wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:31am:

What, in your view, is the biggest misconception about China in the West?

That it is a "threat"? 


Quote:

The single biggest misconception is that you have a wicked government and a good people.

True.

Note: all 'peoples' are "good"; but governments can indeed be bad. 




Quote:

The Chinese have had 3,000 years for the government and the people to shape each other.

Chinese history, like the history of ALL other nations (especially technologically advancing ones), is soaked in blood.



Quote:

The institution in the West that most closely resembles the Chinese system is, in fact, the Sicilian mafia.

Er.....a detour from fact, into ideology-based narrative.


Quote:

Because they’re natural anarchists, they don’t like any form of government.

Er... the CCP IS China's government. 


Quote:

What holds a country of anarchists together, if not the emperor?

Rule by 50% + 1 of naturally competitve, self interested "anarchists"? 


Quote:

Therefore, it’s critical that the meritocracy be fair.

Indeed, on the path to "common prosperity".


Quote:

So, all hope is not lost for the West when the Chinese ‘capo di tutti capi’ is educating his offspring in one of America’s Ivy League schools?

There is no hope for the world if it continues to be oppressed  by powerful financial elites maximizing their own claims on the world's output. 


Quote:

Well, the one thing that we’re much better at than the Chinese is innovation.

Wasn't always the case, and won't be again: Silicon Valley is populated by Chinese, many of whom are choosing to stay home.


Quote:

As I mentioned, Huawei is very much dependent on Western employees for innovation.

Huawei was one of the world's leading IT companies (including 5G). The West couldn't compete, so they banned it on trumped up "security" grounds.


Quote:

I’m not saying the Chinese can’t innovate. During the Tang dynasty (618 to 906 A.D.), which is considered a golden age of Chinese arts and culture, the Chinese invented the clock, the compass, gunpowder, printing and, virtually, all of the elements of the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.

Indeed, as mentioned above.


Quote:

However, the Chinese form of meritocracy, which is based on standardized exams, is the second-best way of running that meritocracy. Albert Einstein, who sat in the Swiss patent office because he couldn’t get a university job … … and then invented the theory of relativity at his private home … Right. This is unimaginable in China.

Wrong. Xi is urging private development in quality production.


Quote:

If you ask the Chinese what worries them the most, many will say, “How come we have no Nobel prizes?” Eight Chinese have won the Nobel prize in sciences, but they are all Chinese who lived in America.

Chinese patents are rapidly overtaking the US.


Quote:

The Chinese system is very bad at identifying those eccentrics, like an Einstein, who make fundamental contributions. We are much better at that. The Western idea of the divine spark in the individual simply doesn’t exist in China. So, I think we do have a chance against the Chinese.

Musk doesn't think so: he said the Chinese "juggernaut" will sweep all before it, without protection in global free markets.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 10:40am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:34am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:21am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:17am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.    China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion. And the US, the world's richest economy,  is 330 million. Who outside the US buys US cars these days? ...which is is why Detroit was devastated by global competition.  In 2022, cars were the world's 5th most traded product (out of 1,218). In 2022...

 
Obsolete -  EVs are just now beginning to hit  the market big time, and China is setting new records in that market. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 11:13am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:40am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:34am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:21am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:17am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.    China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion. And the US, the world's richest economy,  is 330 million. Who outside the US buys US cars these days? ...which is is why Detroit was devastated by global competition.  In 2022, cars were the world's 5th most traded product (out of 1,218). In 2022...   Obsolete -  EVs are just now beginning to hit  the market big time, and China is setting new records in that market.

No doubt people will be initially suckered by the cheap price, until they discover that cheap is cha bu duo cheap.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 11:37am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 11:13am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:40am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:34am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:21am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:17am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.    China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion. And the US, the world's richest economy,  is 330 million. Who outside the US buys US cars these days? ...which is is why Detroit was devastated by global competition.  In 2022, cars were the world's 5th most traded product (out of 1,218). In 2022...   Obsolete -  EVs are just now beginning to hit  the market big time, and China is setting new records in that market.  No doubt people will be initially suckered by the cheap price, until they discover that cheap is cha bu duo cheap.

We will see; and Musk doesn't agree with your 'cheaper = poor quality' thesis.

It is obviously in the Chinese interest to appear “friendly.” They have launched a tremendous PR strategy buying space and time in Western media to propagate themselves as a friendly giant.

They do a very bad job, don’t they?

Why do you think?

Because the Chinese are tone-deaf to Western sensibility, they’re very bad at conducting a dialogue in Western terms. The thing I’m least worried about is Chinese propaganda in the West.They’re very good about generating influence through money and technology and so forth.

But they are not winning hearts and minds?

No. I think the Chinese system is so alien to what Westerners want or expect that it will never look attractive to us.

Kipling was not completely wrong when he wrote, “East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet”?

You can never be China’s friend. We obviously have to do business with China. You can’t isolate 1.4 billion clever and industrious people. That’s absurd. But one can only deal with them successfully from a position of strength.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 12:54pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 11:37am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 11:13am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:40am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:34am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:21am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:17am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.    China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion. And the US, the world's richest economy,  is 330 million. Who outside the US buys US cars these days? ...which is is why Detroit was devastated by global competition.  In 2022, cars were the world's 5th most traded product (out of 1,218). In 2022...   Obsolete -  EVs are just now beginning to hit  the market big time, and China is setting new records in that market.  No doubt people will be initially suckered by the cheap price, until they discover that cheap is cha bu duo cheap. We will see; and Musk doesn't agree with your 'cheaper = poor quality' thesis.

He wouldn't be buying and driving Chinese-made EVs.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 12:54pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 11:37am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 11:13am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:40am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:34am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:21am: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:17am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 10:02am: freediver wrote on Mar 29th, 2024 at 9:58am: Most of what China has done to lift people out of starvation is microeconomic in nature - the most rapid transition from communism to capitalism ever seen. And done in the same feverish, cha bu duo, style the mainland Chinese do everything, which is why the place is a sewer, Poor Meister, a  supreme ignorant political hack  ... China has just become the world's largest producer of PVs and EVs, surpassing Japan as the world's largest exporter of EVs.    China's population is 1.4 billion. Japan's is 0.1 billion. And the US, the world's richest economy,  is 330 million. Who outside the US buys US cars these days? ...which is is why Detroit was devastated by global competition.  In 2022, cars were the world's 5th most traded product (out of 1,218). In 2022...   Obsolete -  EVs are just now beginning to hit  the market big time, and China is setting new records in that market.  No doubt people will be initially suckered by the cheap price, until they discover that cheap is cha bu duo cheap. We will see; and Musk doesn't agree with your 'cheaper = poor quality' thesis. He wouldn't be buying and driving Chinese-made EVs.

??  He's actually manufacturing Teslas in China...while watching  BYD become the largest EV exporter in the world.