Chinese General news resource thread

[airsuperiority]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I wonder when they'll blame it on Mainlanders. The last person standing after the blame game is done will be a spoiled snob who doesn't know how to cook and clean for him or herself.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A self-hater obviously wrote this article as a distraction. This article is about Ferguson.

Top quotes from this article:



Why doesn't the writer just say China is lying killing innocent people instead of hiding behind disproportionate use of force? Like the police have to pull out axes because the terrorists are using axes? Yeah avoid the part where deadly force is used to stop someone from using deadly force in criminal activities. You want to teach criminals a lesson? Publicly execute criminals with blade weapons. No sanitized non-graphic bullet holes where you can't really see what kills them and lay their bodies in the street for their friends and family and everyone to see. That's proportionate equal force.



What happened in 1989?



Yeah and it's wrong because...?

Unethical people everywhere.
For the first case, I'm currently in HK and can say the news is a bit of a shock for locals. The scare comes from that some business do buy their supply of oil from that firm, and of course they didn't know about this until now, so both the consumers and those businesses are quite concerned.

 

[Doombreed]

Why doesn't the writer just say China is lying killing innocent people instead of hiding behind disproportionate use of force? Like the police have to pull out axes because the terrorists are using axes? Yeah avoid the part where deadly force is used to stop someone from using deadly force in criminal activities. You want to teach criminals a lesson? Publicly execute criminals with blade weapons. No sanitized non-graphic bullet holes where you can't really see what kills them and lay their bodies in the street for their friends and family and everyone to see. That's proportionate equal force.

No, that's not what the article was trying to imply. The implication is that Chinese police is potentially using extrajudicial killings in an attempt to crush terrorism in the region. Now, as with all terrorists, nothing should be off limit or too harsh in order to defeat them. But again, what the article is trying to imply is that innocent people may have been killed in this blanket application of naked force.

What happened in 1989?

And that's not something you should be proud about...

Yeah and it's wrong because...?

Nothing, unless you care for the rule of law and due process. Or more importantly, care about killing innocent people in the fight against terrorism.

 

[AssassinsMace]

No, that's not what the article was trying to imply. The implication is that Chinese police is potentially using extrajudicial killings in an attempt to crush terrorism in the region. Now, as with all terrorists, nothing should be off limit or too harsh in order to defeat them. But again, what the article is trying to imply is that innocent people may have been killed in this blanket application of naked force.




And that's not something you should be proud about...



Nothing, unless you care for the rule of law and due process. Or more importantly, care about killing innocent people in the fight against terrorism.

I guess you don't know cynicism when you see it.

 

[Geographer]

Blackstone, on the South China Sea bases thread, you said the following (my bolding):

The Western garbage news just drone on and on, hoping for... what? What is it they want? I'll tell you what; regime change, and NOW! Not tomorrow, not next week, not next month. Now! Don't pass Go, don't collect 200 RMBs, jut democratize! F-the consequences of getting it wrong, and never mind what kind of deadly chaos it might cause if China implodes. Hey! There are Western Dali Lama cult worshipers to please, all 10 of them in Hollywood. And if 50 million Chinese, Tibetan, and Uyghurs die from civil war, well that's just the price of doing business. After all, the Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of innocents, right?

What does "democratize" mean to you?

 

[Blitzo]

More tripe from the BBC on South China Sea disputes. I wouldn't bore readers with a complete overview, suffice to say it's yet another hit piece from the Western press. Oh, it has most of the facts in good order (for a change), and it invariably calls China out for not following international laws (UNLOS), but like most Western lame stream press, the commentator left out the most critical piece of information, and that is under UNCLOS, China has the right to opt out of arbitration!

The Western garbage news just drone on and on, hoping for... what? What is it they want? I'll tell you what; regime change, and NOW! Not tomorrow, not next week, not next month. Now! Don't pass Go, don't collect 200 RMBs, jut democratize! F-the consequences of getting it wrong, and never mind what kind of deadly chaos it might cause if China implodes. Hey! There are Western Dali Lama cult worshipers to please, all 10 of them in Hollywood. And if 50 million Chinese, Tibetan, and Uyghurs die from civil war, well that's just the price of doing business. After all, the Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of innocents, right?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Article is too long to quote, so go read it for yourself.

Blackstone, if you believe democracy is worth everything, then democracy for you itself has become an end rather a means to an end.

Frankly, having such a crazed belief in something as trivial as a nation's political system is more reminiscent of religious zealotry rather than any desire to improve people's lives.
Just as foolish as it was for the USSR and PRC in its earlier days to be so tightly beholden to what they perceived as communist doctrines and a desire to spread it just for the sake of "rightness," it is equally foolish to hope for a western style liberal democracy to work for every country. Political systems should be chosen based on the aims, needs, and conditions of the country in particular, not because of some perceived, unproven, and short lived sense of superiority.



And to be honest, I think it is better if there are multiple different political systems in the world, because it doesn't confine countries to particular modes of operation, and it allows them to change their political systems to the conditions.

 

[A.Man]

Report: Hong Kong becoming 'mere second-tier' Chinese city

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Hong Kong is losing its edge as a global financial and commercial center, and the territory's economic clout will be overshadowed by China's major cities by 2022. That's the argument in an August 27 report released by Trigger Trend, an independent Chinese research firm based in the southern metropolis of Guangzhou. The report emerged just days before Beijing declared it would not countenance open nominations in the planned 2017 popular election for Hong Kong's chief executive, and its findings are likely to stoke further anxiety about the former British colony's economic and political future.

In the wake of Beijing's decision, Hong Kong's democracy advocates now face a hard choice between carrying out what some have called a "nuclear option" to occupy the city's Central financial district en masse, which could disrupt businesses, or swallowing what they call a "fake election" for the Chief Executive, the head of Hong Kong's government. Either way, Beijing says it does not plan to yield to acts of civil disobedience in the special administrative region, even if protests make investors or business owners jittery.

(More from Foreign Policy: The Islamic State vs. al Qaeda)

In taking a hard-line stance against granting true democracy to Hong Kong, the Chinese government has made clear to the rest of China — as well as Taiwan, which Beijing considers a rogue province — that threats of civil disobedience will not lead to political concessions. The central government probably also believes that it can now cast a menacing shadow over Hong Kong with its increasing economic weight. The report by Trigger Trend does not appear to be commissioned by the Chinese government, but the report's conclusions have been widely publicized in mainland media and align nicely with the central government's unspoken message to Hong Kongers: The special administrative region is no longer very special.

To bolster its claim, the report states that Hong Kong's annual GDP growth rate has hovered around two percent in recent years, while major regional centers in China have been growing at over seven percent per year. Hong Kong's 2013 GDP, at an estimated $261 billion, already pales in comparison to Shanghai's, at $354 billion, and Beijing's, at $317 billion. The report also states that at the time of its handover from the British in 1997, Hong Kong's GDP was 15.6 percent of China's national total; by 2013, the city's share had shrunk to 2.9 percent.

According to Trigger Trend, if current growth rates continue, the southern cities of Guangzhou and Shenzhen as well as the northern municipality of Tianjian will likely overtake Hong Kong in terms of GDP by 2017.

(More from Foreign Policy: All tusk and no teeth)





Inland metropolises such as Chongqing, Chengdu, and Wuhan will catch up by 2022. "In the ranking of Chinese cities by economics, Hong Kong may become a mere second tier city" by 2022, the report warned.

As the mainland's foremost commercial city, Shanghai is often seen as Hong Kong's direct competitor. Shanghai announced the establishment of a free trade zone (FTZ) in Sept. 2013, setting up tariff-free ports and offering tax and policy breaks to foreign investors. While the Shanghai FTZ has so far offered more hype than substance, Hong Kong's policymakers have warned that its businesses must be prepared for competition. Some in Hong Kong, particularly members of its business community, have also bought into the logic that the fight for democracy harms the territory's economic competitiveness, or at least presents a serious distraction from the issues that concern Hong Kong residents' livelihoods, like employment and social welfare.

But Hong Kong's position as a global financial center rests on more than just the size of its GDP. The city boasts superb infrastructure, a well-established legal system, and a cosmopolitan culture that no mainland city, including Beijing or Shanghai, has yet been able to replicate. In 2012, the Economist Intelligence Unit, a research outfit, ranked Hong Kong the fourth-most competitive city in the world, far ahead of Beijing (ranked 39th) and Shanghai (ranked 43rd). Hong Kong is also a much wealthier city in terms of per-capita income than its mainland peers. What's more, it remains a golden goose for China in terms of its function as a gateway to international investment and human capital. Investors, expatriates, and new immigrants flock to Hong Kong because the city is perceived to be more livable, with safer food, cleaner air, freer media, and a fairer judiciary than Chinese metropolises.

(More from Foreign Policy: Why Myanmar's leaders misled the world about its population)

The hard data on Hong Kong's decline in economic clout relative to the mainland may be undisputable, but it remains a first class global city on the strength of its soft power. Hong Kong's ability to maintain its advantages is largely based on its relative political autonomy from China and the strength of its civic institutions — the very things that recent rumblings from Beijing imperil. Should it lose its uniqueness, Hong Kong's future as a second tier city in China is all but assured.

 

[airsuperiority]

Report: Hong Kong becoming 'mere second-tier' Chinese city

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Hong Kong is losing its edge as a global financial and commercial center, and the territory's economic clout will be overshadowed by China's major cities by 2022. That's the argument in an August 27 report released by Trigger Trend, an independent Chinese research firm based in the southern metropolis of Guangzhou. The report emerged just days before Beijing declared it would not countenance open nominations in the planned 2017 popular election for Hong Kong's chief executive, and its findings are likely to stoke further anxiety about the former British colony's economic and political future.

In the wake of Beijing's decision, Hong Kong's democracy advocates now face a hard choice between carrying out what some have called a "nuclear option" to occupy the city's Central financial district en masse, which could disrupt businesses, or swallowing what they call a "fake election" for the Chief Executive, the head of Hong Kong's government. Either way, Beijing says it does not plan to yield to acts of civil disobedience in the special administrative region, even if protests make investors or business owners jittery.

(More from Foreign Policy: The Islamic State vs. al Qaeda)

In taking a hard-line stance against granting true democracy to Hong Kong, the Chinese government has made clear to the rest of China — as well as Taiwan, which Beijing considers a rogue province — that threats of civil disobedience will not lead to political concessions. The central government probably also believes that it can now cast a menacing shadow over Hong Kong with its increasing economic weight. The report by Trigger Trend does not appear to be commissioned by the Chinese government, but the report's conclusions have been widely publicized in mainland media and align nicely with the central government's unspoken message to Hong Kongers: The special administrative region is no longer very special.

To bolster its claim, the report states that Hong Kong's annual GDP growth rate has hovered around two percent in recent years, while major regional centers in China have been growing at over seven percent per year. Hong Kong's 2013 GDP, at an estimated $261 billion, already pales in comparison to Shanghai's, at $354 billion, and Beijing's, at $317 billion. The report also states that at the time of its handover from the British in 1997, Hong Kong's GDP was 15.6 percent of China's national total; by 2013, the city's share had shrunk to 2.9 percent.

According to Trigger Trend, if current growth rates continue, the southern cities of Guangzhou and Shenzhen as well as the northern municipality of Tianjian will likely overtake Hong Kong in terms of GDP by 2017.

(More from Foreign Policy: All tusk and no teeth)





Inland metropolises such as Chongqing, Chengdu, and Wuhan will catch up by 2022. "In the ranking of Chinese cities by economics, Hong Kong may become a mere second tier city" by 2022, the report warned.

As the mainland's foremost commercial city, Shanghai is often seen as Hong Kong's direct competitor. Shanghai announced the establishment of a free trade zone (FTZ) in Sept. 2013, setting up tariff-free ports and offering tax and policy breaks to foreign investors. While the Shanghai FTZ has so far offered more hype than substance, Hong Kong's policymakers have warned that its businesses must be prepared for competition. Some in Hong Kong, particularly members of its business community, have also bought into the logic that the fight for democracy harms the territory's economic competitiveness, or at least presents a serious distraction from the issues that concern Hong Kong residents' livelihoods, like employment and social welfare.

But Hong Kong's position as a global financial center rests on more than just the size of its GDP. The city boasts superb infrastructure, a well-established legal system, and a cosmopolitan culture that no mainland city, including Beijing or Shanghai, has yet been able to replicate. In 2012, the Economist Intelligence Unit, a research outfit, ranked Hong Kong the fourth-most competitive city in the world, far ahead of Beijing (ranked 39th) and Shanghai (ranked 43rd). Hong Kong is also a much wealthier city in terms of per-capita income than its mainland peers. What's more, it remains a golden goose for China in terms of its function as a gateway to international investment and human capital. Investors, expatriates, and new immigrants flock to Hong Kong because the city is perceived to be more livable, with safer food, cleaner air, freer media, and a fairer judiciary than Chinese metropolises.

(More from Foreign Policy: Why Myanmar's leaders misled the world about its population)

The hard data on Hong Kong's decline in economic clout relative to the mainland may be undisputable, but it remains a first class global city on the strength of its soft power. Hong Kong's ability to maintain its advantages is largely based on its relative political autonomy from China and the strength of its civic institutions — the very things that recent rumblings from Beijing imperil. Should it lose its uniqueness, Hong Kong's future as a second tier city in China is all but assured.

The article very well illustrates how HKers are perceiving ourselves. HK lost its faith in CCP since 1989 and honestly been the same since, for good reasons. Everyone feared CCP will mess up HK after '97, hence that wave of immigration of HK to overseas in the '90s. Although CCP promised to leave HK's political autonomy alone at the time, we watched gradual sneaky attempts to change HK and to get involved. The article 23 was a great example, followers by the nationalistic education and the Chief Executive Election in 2012. Now CCP even made overt announcements thru the White Paper and the recent NPC announcements. To top it off, the SAR govt, CE, legislatures, the pro-China politicians, and business elites became a rubber stamp for what CCP wants. The elites only care about business and opportunities and cared nothing about HK's values, and with these we watched the gradual decline of rule of law. Our former CE Donald Tsang and former director of our anti-corruption bureau ICAC Timothy Tong have corruption scandals. On top of those, resource competitions from mainland immigrants and investors had made life unsustainable for the new generation. Average income for one person is around $240,000 per year, but a regular apartment unit with 2 bedrooms is around $5million HKD. This is unsustainable, and to the point it's pretty often the new generation have to lend money or borrow from parents to host their wedding. All this happened after the flux of mainland investors landed in HK and cooked up the price. Before 2003, houses are around $1 million HKD only. (same happened in Vancouver, where average income is $30,000cad per year but properties are listing around $1million, and again the same trend happened due to investors cooking up the houses) This is why Vancouver and HK ranked the highest in terms of unsustainable housing prices. Other stuffs included mainland immigrants who abused the maternity wards to land citizenship and then leeching off social safety net, rude and poor etiquette mainlanders which make things worse for the good apples. This is why the HK public is so distraught with HK now. We know where our values are, and that lies in our infrastructure, work ethics, rule of law, education, mannerism, culture, health, human rights, freedom, freedom of speech, etc., which sets us apart from mainland China. That's exactly what the article named. However resource scarcity and interference from CCP are eroding our values, which is why HK is becoming so tense. We are going through a severe crisis. This is why the HK public are so resilient right now. We are defending those values and have to take a stand. We believe only true democratic process where we pick our politicians do we us have more say to how we want things, instead of someone up top who appoints someone who only serves the interests of Mainland first. Our SAR govt no longer look out for us. And be noted, the voices of today are expressed by middle aged groups, the new generation, who had experienced the changes. Technically we all know HK can't escape the fate of integrating with mainland, but we want to preserve our identity, values, and be respected in those areas. If CCP had known better and actually leave it to us to sort our things out, the integration will come naturally and harmonious, and it won't require futile nationalistic education and the like. Unfortunately CCP is a control freak and our govt is impotent and unrepresentative of the public, while we all know the stakes at hand if we let this black box system passes, not to mention how CCP is eating it's words on the Joint Declaration, therefore you have this standoff today. Think about it, what can cause 100,000 people to march on the streets every year for the past 6-7 years? And an Occupy Movement that's lasted for years when most others around the world have ceased?
And of course it's funny how CCP can attempt to blame all this on "foreign interference". Actually, the fact that CCP can get infuriated by a public opinion poll conducted by HKU surveying HK public's opinions of the electoral system preference is laughable. The poll is not even law-effective, but that was enough to cause CCP to publish a White Paper to condemn an academic survey. And to prove another point, there are articles recently of some local politicians "praising" this proposed election system as "democratic" and a bunch of other bullshit. If any of you who can read Chinese wants to see them, I can post them up.

Just think about what if all of what I had is happening at your city/community. What will you do? How will you feel?

 

[Equation]

The article very well illustrates how HKers are perceiving ourselves. HK lost its faith in CCP since 1989 and honestly been the same since, for good reasons. Everyone feared CCP will mess up HK after '97, hence that wave of immigration of HK to overseas in the '90s. Although CCP promised to leave HK's political autonomy alone at the time, we watched gradual sneaky attempts to change HK and to get involved. The article 23 was a great example, followers by the nationalistic education and the Chief Executive Election in 2012. Now CCP even made overt announcements thru the White Paper and the recent NPC announcements. To top it off, the SAR govt, CE, legislatures, the pro-China politicians, and business elites became a rubber stamp for what CCP wants. The elites only care about business and opportunities and cared nothing about HK's values, and with these we watched the gradual decline of rule of law. Our former CE Donald Tsang and former director of our anti-corruption bureau ICAC Timothy Tong have corruption scandals. On top of those, resource competitions from mainland immigrants and investors had made life unsustainable for the new generation. Average income for one person is around $240,000 per year, but a regular apartment unit with 2 bedrooms is around $5million HKD. This is unsustainable, and to the point it's pretty often the new generation have to lend money or borrow from parents to host their wedding. All this happened after the flux of mainland investors landed in HK and cooked up the price. Before 2003, houses are around $1 million HKD only. (same happened in Vancouver, where average income is $30,000cad per year but properties are listing around $1million, and again the same trend happened due to investors cooking up the houses) This is why Vancouver and HK ranked the highest in terms of unsustainable housing prices. Other stuffs included mainland immigrants who abused the maternity wards to land citizenship and then leeching off social safety net, rude and poor etiquette mainlanders which make things worse for the good apples. This is why the HK public is so distraught with HK now. We know where our values are, and that lies in our infrastructure, work ethics, rule of law, education, mannerism, culture, health, human rights, freedom, freedom of speech, etc., which sets us apart from mainland China. That's exactly what the article named. However resource scarcity and interference from CCP are eroding our values, which is why HK is becoming so tense. We are going through a severe crisis. This is why the HK public are so resilient right now. We are defending those values and have to take a stand. We believe only true democratic process where we pick our politicians do we us have more say to how we want things, instead of someone up top who appoints someone who only serves the interests of Mainland first. Our SAR govt no longer look out for us. And be noted, the voices of today are expressed by middle aged groups, the new generation, who had experienced the changes. Technically we all know HK can't escape the fate of integrating with mainland, but we want to preserve our identity, values, and be respected in those areas. If CCP had known better and actually leave it to us to sort our things out, the integration will come naturally and harmonious, and it won't require futile nationalistic education and the like. Unfortunately CCP is a control freak and our govt is impotent and unrepresentative of the public, while we all know the stakes at hand if we let this black box system passes, not to mention how CCP is eating it's words on the Joint Declaration, therefore you have this standoff today. Think about it, what can cause 100,000 people to march on the streets every year for the past 6-7 years? And an Occupy Movement that's lasted for years when most others around the world have ceased?
And of course it's funny how CCP can attempt to blame all this on "foreign interference". Actually, the fact that CCP can get infuriated by a public opinion poll conducted by HKU surveying HK public's opinions of the electoral system preference is laughable. The poll is not even law-effective, but that was enough to cause CCP to publish a White Paper to condemn an academic survey. And to prove another point, there are articles recently of some local politicians "praising" this proposed election system as "democratic" and a bunch of other bullshit. If any of you who can read Chinese wants to see them, I can post them up.

Just think about what if all of what I had is happening at your city/community. What will you do? How will you feel?

What's so "impotent" about the CCP for upbringing 500 million people out of poverty? How many people has the HK government helped during their vassal state under British rule? Hong Kong is just another Chinese city. You are not entitle to anything, don't know why you insist upon it.

 

[airsuperiority]

What's so "impotent" about the CCP for upbringing 500 million people out of poverty? How many people has the HK government helped during their vassal state under British rule? Hong Kong is just another Chinese city. You are not entitle to anything, don't know why you insist upon it.

1. I'm referring to the HKSAR goverment as impotent.
2. HK govt under British rule modernized the city to first world economy, one of the Five Asian Tigers, rule of law, freedom of speech, one of the least corrupted states(top20) and even above US, one of the freest economy and to do business, established ICAC, modernized health care, education, modernized transportation systems, 4th international financial center after Tokyo New York London, it's own major competitive GDP, HKU ranking top 50 university, competing for too spots with Singapore for many aspects, list goes on. Everything we have today came from the days of British rule and city building and infrastructure building. Even HK's PTU was established by RHKPF when under the crown. And our Counterterrorist unit the SDU was established, trained, and modeled after the SAS. SDU cross trained with the British and American SOFs. If HK is its own state we will be a blue state like Singapore. Singapore is almost a state equivalent of what we are. We even have our own identity in the WTO, although I'm not sure if this occurred under HKSAR a or British rule.
3. If I replace "Chinese city" with American, and "Hong Kong" with "you", this is what your statement reads as: "You are just another American, so you are not entitled to anything, (including your own unique identity and values). Don't know why you insist upon it." If you find offense at what I have said, then you are taking offense to your own logics of your earlier statement.
4. Before you make any statements about HK, have you been there? If you haven't, and you don't know anything about HK and don't understand HK, then I wonder how and where you can base your opinions of. Hard to take your opinions seriously when you don't understand what's going on and you're so quick to make these sorts of statements.

 

[Equation]

1. I'm referring to the HKSAR goverment as impotent.
2. HK govt under British rule modernized the city to first world economy, one of the Five Asian Tigers, rule of law, freedom of speech, one of the least corrupted states(top20) and even above US, one of the freest economy and to do business, established ICAC, modernized health care, education, modernized transportation systems, HKU ranking top 50 university, competing for too spots with Singapore for many aspects, list goes on. Everything we have today came from the days of British rule and city building and infrastructure building. Even HK's PTU was established by RHKPF when under the crown. And our Counterterrorist unit the SDU was established, trained, and modeled after the SAS. SDU cross trained with the British and American SOFs. If HK is its own state we will be a blue state like Singapore. Singapore is almost a state equivalent of what we are. We even have our own identity in the WTO, although I'm not sure if this occurred under HKSAR a or British rule.
3. If I replace "Chinese city" with American, and "Hong Kong" with "you", this is what your statement reads as: "You are just another American, so you are not entitled to anything, (including your own unique identity and values). Don't know why you insist upon it." If you find offense at what I have said, then you are taking offense to your own logics of your earlier statement.
4. Before you make any statements about HK, have you been there? If you haven't, and you don't know anything about HK and don't understand HK, then I wonder how and where you can base your opinions of. Hard to take your opinions seriously when you don't understand what's going on and you're so quick to make these sorts of statements.

1. So you think under British rule is better just because it satisfies your view of "democracy"?

2. HK was built by colonization money nothing glamorous about that. Even today HK needs the mainland more to keep it's economy going.

3. What is so "unique" about HK that you deemed needs to be protected at all cost? Other Chinese people has the right to move in and out of Hk and any other Chinese cities as they like.

4. No I have never been there and I don't need to be there to argue with you. If you don't like the changes of HK than leave, no one is stopping you. Why insist of maintaining this "unique" status quo, you sound just like those Japanese elitist insisting on maintaining a status quo in the western Pacific for some reason? What is it that you are afraid of and unable or unwilling to adapt?