Jump to content

China's Peaceful Rise


chino

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Strannik said:

It would be funny if it were not sad propaganda: 👇 The Economist blaming "autocratic" Xi whose policies are curtailing the supply side model investments which were happening under the watch of "liberal leaning" Jiang and Hu and which this (and many other outfits) proclaimed unsustainable for decade and a half.

 

 

I hardly want to come to the defense of that article, but I think the basic premise - that bad decisions got China to where it is - is perfectly accurate.

 

Also there is no need to put autocratic in quotes; China is the very definition of autocratic. I don’t see how you could make an argument against that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Josh said:

I hardly want to come to the defense of that article, but I think the basic premise - that bad decisions got China to where it is - is perfectly accurate.

I think China inevitably has a recession after 30 years of economic expansion.  Xi maybe made some bad decisions that brought forward that day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Josh said:

I hardly want to come to the defense of that article, but I think the basic premise - that bad decisions got China to where it is - is perfectly accurate.

 

Also there is no need to put autocratic in quotes; China is the very definition of autocratic. I don’t see how you could make an argument against that.

Again whose decisions got the country to that point?

"Liberal" predecessors of Xi or his own?  Or maybe his attempts to deflate is causing it, bit avoiding a much nastier collapse?

Do you mind me using quotes here?

The point is - this British rag lost all the credibility long time ago - see a nice collection of it's China covers (as in we a will die at some point) and the pathetic attempt to solely blame it on Xi

 

Edited by Strannik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Strannik said:

Again whose decisions got the country to that point?

"Liberal" predecessors of Xi or his own?  Or maybe his attempts to deflate is causing it, bit avoiding a much nastier collapse?

Do you mind me using quotes here?

The point is - this British rag lost all the credibility long time ago - see a nice collection of it's China covers (as in we a will die at some point) and the pathetic attempt to solely blame it on Xi

 

 

I never said who made the bad decisions. Some definitely predate Xi. In fact, outside of the crackdown on private enterprise and increased security measures, Xi really hasn't changed much. The use of public infrastructure projects as a mechanism of economic stimulus dates back at minimum to the 2008 US crash (and it should be noted that this was a perfectly workable policy for economic growth that has simply been exhausted). One Child goes back to the late '70s. But here we are now.

As for the China is failing motif, yes everyone has been predicting it for some time, partially because their economy is so opaque and their numbers so hard to trust. But we are seeing actual numbers now that indicate the biggest slowdown of growth in 40 years. Will China economically stagnate? Perhaps not, but it seems very safe to say its peak growth is behind it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Strannik said:

More like they follow the party line.

Just highlighting the fallacy of their latest trope that folks like to parrot lately.

In 2004 they saluted just elected PM of Spain as someone that could bring more free market to Spain.

That sorry excuse of a PM was called Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, likely the worst Spanish PM since 1977.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Josh said:

 

I never said who made the bad decisions. Some definitely predate Xi. In fact, outside of the crackdown on private enterprise and increased security measures, Xi really hasn't changed much. The use of public infrastructure projects as a mechanism of economic stimulus dates back at minimum to the 2008 US crash (and it should be noted that this was a perfectly workable policy for economic growth that has simply been exhausted). One Child goes back to the late '70s. But here we are now.

As for the China is failing motif, yes everyone has been predicting it for some time, partially because their economy is so opaque and their numbers so hard to trust. But we are seeing actual numbers now that indicate the biggest slowdown of growth in 40 years. Will China economically stagnate? Perhaps not, but it seems very safe to say its peak growth is behind it.

So we started with me saying the article is a propaganda piece and you are saying that you would buy the broken clock with an ugly face because it's that time of day and it's  correct atm?

Edited by Strannik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sunday said:

In 2004 they saluted just elected PM of Spain as someone that could bring more free market to Spain.

That sorry excuse of a PM was called Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, likely the worst Spanish PM since 1977.

They turned into trashy hacks.  Very little journalism left there.  Just like the Beeb.

Edited by Strannik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, glenn239 said:

I think China inevitably has a recession after 30 years of economic expansion.  Xi maybe made some bad decisions that brought forward that day.

There is no inevitability. It's always a policy choice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Josh said:

Will China economically stagnate? Perhaps not, but it seems very safe to say its peak growth is behind it.

Peak growth is behind it due to the simple mathematics of growth accounting. China is now capital rich enough (but nor at all close to the extent of the wealthy developed nations) that the marginal returns to capital deepening are reduced, though still high, and TFP growth is harder to attain. 

Gone are the days where labour productivity could be increased several fold by putting a surplus peasant into a very cheaply made manufacturing facilities. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, glenn239 said:

I think China inevitably has a recession after 30 years of economic expansion.  Xi maybe made some bad decisions that brought forward that day.

The real question is if this recession will be "natural" or man-made

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sunday said:

In 2004 they saluted just elected PM of Spain as someone that could bring more free market to Spain.

That sorry excuse of a PM was called Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, likely the worst Spanish PM since 1977.

The Economist is represents the globalist managerial class. It is only useful to know what they are thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Strannik said:

So we started with me saying the article is a propaganda piece and you are saying that you would buy the broken clock with an ugly face because it's that time of day and it's  correct atm?

I’m just pointing out the broken clock is right in this this particular instance. I’ve no interest in purchasing it. I’m not buying what Zeihan is selling either.

Edited by Josh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, lucklucky said:

The Economist is represents the globalist managerial class. It is only useful to know what they are thinking.

There was also an obituary on criminal-cum-rapper Tupac Shakur, very positive, followed some years later by one on Mother Theresa, very critical of her...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The posts were part of a Chinese influence campaign that stands out as the largest such operation to date, researchers at Meta said in a report on Tuesday. The effort, which the company said had started with Chinese law enforcement and was discovered in 2019, was aimed at advancing China’s interests and discrediting its adversaries, such as the United States, Meta said.

In total, 7,704 Facebook accounts, 954 Facebook pages, 15 Facebook groups and 15 Instagram accounts tied to the Chinese campaign were removed by Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. Hundreds of other accounts on TikTok, X, LiveJournal and Blogspot also participated in the campaign, which researchers named Spamouflage, for the frequent posting of spamlike messages, according to Meta’s report.

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...