Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
A friend of mine from Beijing told me back when Alibaba first IPOd not to buy their shares because Jack Ma did not see eye-to-eye with Xi Jingping, so I bought other stock instead, which was good foresight.
When you consider that the United States was founded as a rich boys' club/monied elites wanting to be above the government you can understand why they are so petrified of China.
When the CCP can just as easily execute a billionaire for corruption, it petrifies the billionaire class of the anglosphere. When China becomes as powerful as the US, what's to stop the CCP from extraditing themselves and their families for attempting to corrupt or bribe Chinese government officials?
They can always teach their children Chinese and marry them off to some powerful red princeling when that happens. Oh wait...
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Those are the ones that bother to know but these days it's all about whose side you're on. Look at the Washington insurrection. They were hiding behind democracy but they were fighting to deny the right to vote for others.
Did you buy JD.com instead?
Perhaps you can help me out because there's something I cant figure out exactly why to my satisfaction.
I've been comparing dual listed stocks eg
Petro China Company Limited listed on the NYSE @ $35.24US 9th April with a strong buy recommendation and on the HK Exchange it is pretty flat @ $2.73 HKD....thanks
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
You never defined what curbed means, even when asked multiple times. I thought you meant to strip them of their wealth and make it impossible to become wealthy beyond a certain point, but apparently, not. Essentially, you are saying nothing. I ask you again, what do you want to do with them?
LOLOLOL Don't add things you didn't say before. Corruption was never there; you just said billionaires, which means people like Ren Zhengfei fighting for Chinese tech dominance, and you want to "curb" him, whatever that means.
Don't flatter yourself; you could never pressure me with your "I think we should curb billionaires but don't know what 'curb' means" literary diarrhea. I made no contradictions. You asked me about billionaires, and then tried to switch the word to suddenly mean corruption, which I and other members do not agree with. You ain't slick.
Corruption is corruption and billionaires are billionaires. If you want to "curb" (a word you keep using but don't know the meaning of in your own context) corrupt billionaires who don't contribute back to society but rob it, of course everyone agrees. But if you just want to do something (that you cannot define because you didn't give much thought to it) to billionaires, then you are targeting the tech champs and start-ups that need that capital and need national support to fight on the global stage, and that's my gripe with you.
The only thing that can "doom" the US is being surpassed by China; before China, the US was calm, composed, and the unchallenged in the world. But when China appeared and started growing at a much faster speed, the US got nervous and started fouling up its image. Despite this, America is still growing and still has all its vitality.
More of your imaginary situations and blindness.
Declining compared to China because China is growing faster. But as an absolute, and in comparison to every other major country, the US is growing. If you think that the US is actually declining, then tell me by which parameters it is weakening. Is its military smaller/weaker/less advanced than it was yesterday? Is America becoming a less technologically-advanced nation compared to yesterday? Is its economy smaller (take away the COVID bump and get the long term trend)? No, none of it. America is not in decline; it is growing, but not as fast as China.
So you changed the word from "curbed" to "tackled"? Can you define "tackled" instead? LOL I've never seen someone to confidently and ardently argue that he wants something that he does not know to be done.
And what the hell does that mean? They need a GPS tracker in their necks that also records everything they hear, see, and say? Open to whom? If the boss of a tech company wants to put secret research into black projects to create products that he wants to suddenly drop on the market by storm and take out unprepared foreign competitors, is that supposed to be open information to the public as well?
They're not as foolish as people who think that America's in decline and China just needs to keep itself alive to harvest the carcass. Crooks might have made off with trillions of dollars but that same system also made America the growing and deadly superpower it is today.
And hey, check this out! This is back:
"when I do a point-to-point, I actually answer every point. You just ignored all the hard questions that you couldn't answer, picked a few sentences and responded to them in a way that does nothing except make it look like you're still carrying the conversation when you know you're talking on empty."
Last edited:
Ren is just a cog in a vast machine fighting for Chinese tech dominance, the work is done by the workers within the economic entity known as Huawei. Ren's role is assessing reports and issuing orders, and we don't know how many orders are his own creation and how many are him following commands from the State. Regardless, his person is replaceable even if his role as chief order-giver might be irreplaceable. In fact, it would be unwise for any organization to not plan for redundancy of leadership.
I actually wouldn't be surprised if that was a plan by the Anglos; Bo Xilai for instance had his family ensconced in the UK until his downfall, and back when i was at uni in the 2000s, many chinese student associations were merely FLG and christian fundamentalist indoctrination cult centres. This changed when mainland associations set up their own groups.
Up until President Xi, there was a lot of corrupt officials wanting to move money and family into places like australia and putting it into australian real estate. It's not an exaggeration to say that Xi saved China from a potential Yeltsin era China.
Corruption indexes only show illegal corruption. Countries with legalized corruption like the US and UK have high numbers of billionaires. It's also self evident why these countries have legalized corruption.