End of Western World & The Birth of New Global Order
Immortalist
the developed world, the rich world.
The rise of China is projected to overtake the size of the American
economy around 2027. And by 2050, the Chinese economy will be twice
the size of that of the American economy.
This will fundamentally shift the economic center of gravity in the
world and will have also profound political and cultural implications.
There’s been a funny old assumption in the West somehow that China’s
rise is just an economic story but the rise of a new global power
always ushers in the expression of a much more comprehensive
political, cultural, intellectual, military, moral influence, and this
will in time happen in China.
America will get richer, as other Western countries will get richer.
But it will no longer shape the world, as it has in the last sixty
years, or the West, in general.
For 200 years, we’ve lived in a Western-shaped world. That era is
progressively going to come to an end, as China becomes more and more
influential. This is already happening in certain parts of the world,
much more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
For example, the rise of Mandarin in the region; It’s already a
compulsory language in several countries-Thailand, for example, and
South Korea. And I would expect Mandarin to become, over the next
fifty years, a second language in the region, alongside English, maybe
usurping English in the longer run.
East Asia is home to one-third of the world’s population, and it’s
already the largest economic region in the world. It’s bigger than
North America, and it’s bigger than Europe.
China is not really even a nation state in any conventional sense.
We’re so used to thinking of countries as nation states. They arrived
at something which isn’t really a conventional nation state. It’s
really a civilization state, which thinks and acts in a completely
different way to the way in which Western states have operated. So
this kind of-the Chinese way of thinking will become-will begin to
permeate those areas of the world in which it-with which it comes into
contact.
China has become extremely active, proactive with many regions. Latin
America is one example, but the most dramatic, in a way, is Africa,
which is a very short period of time. China is really becoming very
rapidly the most important economic partner of the African continent.
Now, how to understand this, I think, is going to be a very—you know,
it’s going to be a complex process. Generally,
Westerners react by saying, “Ah, maybe this is a new form of
colonialism.” And it may be that there will be elements of similarity.
We should go back to something that, as Westerners, we’re entirely
unfamiliar with, which is the tributary state period, which was the
way in which China organized its relations with East Asia for well
over 2,000 years and only came to an end a hundred years ago...
For thirty years, ever since 1978, the Chinese economy has been
growing at around about ten percent a year, which is phenomenal. The
Chinese economy, in size, has been doubling every seven years. And it
also means that Chinese living standards have been proportionately
transformed. So, if you go to any of the big Chinese cities, and
notably Shanghai, Beijing and so on, you’ll see a very-in many ways,
very developed cities. But, of course, China is very diverse, so half
the population still lives in the countryside, and many people are
poor.
This transformation has meant that China has been responsible for more
than half the reduction in global poverty over the last thirty years.
So this is the most remarkable economic transformation in human
history.
-------------------------------------
Now, one of the problems is the West finds it, I think, very difficult
to understand the process that’s taken place. It’s had an agenda for
China, as it has an agenda for other countries, and it’s felt that
China should be more like us. Or this process-I mean, both the Clinton
and the Bush presidencies were informed by the idea that China’s
modernization would be a process of Westernization, in which China
would end up, in terms of political system, media and so on, like us.
And it hasn’t. It hasn’t. And I think this is raising a big question
for Western leaders, which is, so maybe China will not inevitably
become like us-in my opinion, it will not, because a country is shaped
not just by markets and technology and so on, but also by its history
and its culture. And this is something that Western hubris is not good
at addressing, because historically, for 200 years, we’ve always
thought that ultimately other cultures will bend to our will and
become like us, because we are the state of the art. And this will not
be true in relationship to China. It’s an illusion. And while this
illusion persists, our understanding of China will be limited.
We’ve made so many predictions about what would happen to China over
this period that have been wrong. You know, after Tiananmen Square,
China would divide. The Chinese Communist Party would wither away or
collapse like the Soviet Communist Party did after the fall of the
Berlin Wall. Didn’t happen. They offered-when Hong Kong was handed
over by Britain to Hong Kong-to China, China said, “One country, two
systems.” We said-we didn’t believe it. They meant it. They meant it.
It is one country, two systems. So, another prediction: the economic
growth would not last. It has lasted. So we’ve got China wrong in so
many ways. We need to rethink how we understand China, because it’s
never going to be a Western-style country.
This is a new phenomenon because we’ve never had before a developing
country becoming one of the world’s biggest economies. Hitherto in the
Western world of the last 200 years, since the British Industrial
Revolution started in 1780, every country which has been top dog has
been—had a big economy and a very high standard of living, every—
Britain, Germany, France and, of course, the US. Now we’re in a
different situation, where the biggest economies in the world are
increasingly going to be very populist countries, and therefore
they’ll have big economies, but they will also have a relatively lower
standard of living. This is a new situation.
The question of human rights, in general has improved a lot in this
area. I mean, you know, developing countries have everywhere very
mixed reputations in these terms, because the whole issue of
development out of poverty and so on, you know, it’s an authoritarian
life that people lead. They don’t have choices in the way that we
enjoy choices in the West. And so, China has had a very indifferent
human rights record. But so has India, by the way, and that’s a
democracy.
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/11/19/shunning_dissidents_obama_leaves_china_without
http://www.democracynow.org/
Giga
"Immortalist" <reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d317fe6f-5ef8-45fb...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
With the rise of the developing world comes the relative decline of
the developed world, the rich world.
The rise of China is projected to overtake the size of the American
economy around 2027. And by 2050, the Chinese economy will be twice
the size of that of the American economy.
This will fundamentally shift the economic center of gravity in the
world and will have also profound political and cultural implications.
There�s been a funny old assumption in the West somehow that China�s
rise is just an economic story but the rise of a new global power
always ushers in the expression of a much more comprehensive
political, cultural, intellectual, military, moral influence, and this
will in time happen in China.
America will get richer, as other Western countries will get richer.
But it will no longer shape the world, as it has in the last sixty
years, or the West, in general.
For 200 years, we�ve lived in a Western-shaped world. That era is
progressively going to come to an end, as China becomes more and more
influential.
=Except China is already very influenced by some western ideas, but sure
will bring a philosophical breath of very fresh air hopefully.
This is already happening in certain parts of the world,
much more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
For example, the rise of Mandarin in the region; It�s already a
compulsory language in several countries-Thailand,
=What! Got a reference for that?
ZerkonXXXX
> And I would expect Mandarin to become, over the next fifty years, a
> second language in the region, alongside English, maybe usurping English
> in the longer run.
China will also have the largest English speaking population in the world!
Add in India...
China scenarios usually always leave out one thing. Social upheaval.
Or ...
"The Biggest Threat [to China] is not Social Unrest but Societal
Breakdown"
This article written by Sun Liping, a professor of sociology at Tsinghua
University, is interesting, to say the least, not only because he
addresses a condition in China but, being a academician, can hardly help
himself from also addressing all societies.
excerpts:
=================
3. The opposite of social unrest is social stability; the opposite of
societal breakdown is societal health. Although the two are often
related, they should be distinguished. Now the problem is, the
misdiagnosis of the former often becomes the obstacle of treating the
latter. It's like a cancer patient who needs surgery, but the doctor
misdiagnoses the patient as having a heart attack, counter indicating
surgery. In fact the patient may not be having a heart attack, or may be
having only a mild one. In societal reality, some reforms are needed to
prevent societal breakdown, but the concern that the reforms would
threaten social stability has pushed them aside, and the consequence of
this is that the tendency toward societal breakdown becomes more obvious.
...............
5. In recent years, signs of societal breakdown have become more
apparent. The core problem is the loss of control over power. During the
past 30 years of reform, despite the establishment of a basic framework
for a market economy, power remains the backbone of our society. Because
societal breakdown first appears as the loss of control over power,
corruption is but the surface manifestation. By loss of control over
power I mean that power becomes a force unconstrained not only
externally, but also internally. Before this, although it lacked external
constraints, internal constraints had been relatively effective. The
power base is weakening; several years ago we had already heard the
saying "commands don’t reach outside of Zhongnanhai [the headquarters of
the CCP and China’s Central Government]." Local power and sector power
have become unconstrained from above and unmonitored from below, at the
same time lacking any check or balance from the left or right. This is to
say, state power is fragmented, and officials are unable to work
responsibly. To preserve their positions they don't balk at sacrificing
system benefits (not to mention societal interest). With this background,
corruption has gotten beyond control and become untreatable.
or
http://www.insideoutchina.com/2009/03/biggest-threat-is-not-social-unrest-
but.html
------------------------
China is as volatile as any other country. What has really changed as far
as China and the West is concerned is in ages past when China moved the
rest of the world was pretty much buffered, today is most decidedly is
not.
and this crap:
"End of Western World & The Birth of New Global Order "
Is only crap-speak. The thing possibly ending, thankfully, is cultural
myopia and this screwed up, self defeating, always failing perspective of
'world domination'.
Jerry Okamura
has 300 million people. As a result, for the United States to stay ahead of
the game, their people would need to outpace the people of China by a three
to one margin.
"Immortalist" <reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d317fe6f-5ef8-45fb...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
With the rise of the developing world comes the relative decline of
the developed world, the rich world.
The rise of China is projected to overtake the size of the American
economy around 2027. And by 2050, the Chinese economy will be twice
the size of that of the American economy.
This will fundamentally shift the economic center of gravity in the
world and will have also profound political and cultural implications.
There�s been a funny old assumption in the West somehow that China�s
rise is just an economic story but the rise of a new global power
always ushers in the expression of a much more comprehensive
political, cultural, intellectual, military, moral influence, and this
will in time happen in China.
America will get richer, as other Western countries will get richer.
But it will no longer shape the world, as it has in the last sixty
years, or the West, in general.
For 200 years, we�ve lived in a Western-shaped world. That era is
progressively going to come to an end, as China becomes more and more
influential. This is already happening in certain parts of the world,
much more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
For example, the rise of Mandarin in the region; It�s already a
compulsory language in several countries-Thailand, for example, and
South Korea. And I would expect Mandarin to become, over the next
fifty years, a second language in the region, alongside English, maybe
usurping English in the longer run.
East Asia is home to one-third of the world�s population, and it�s
already the largest economic region in the world. It�s bigger than
North America, and it�s bigger than Europe.
China is not really even a nation state in any conventional sense.
We�re so used to thinking of countries as nation states. They arrived
at something which isn�t really a conventional nation state. It�s
really a civilization state, which thinks and acts in a completely
different way to the way in which Western states have operated. So
this kind of-the Chinese way of thinking will become-will begin to
permeate those areas of the world in which it-with which it comes into
contact.
China has become extremely active, proactive with many regions. Latin
America is one example, but the most dramatic, in a way, is Africa,
which is a very short period of time. China is really becoming very
rapidly the most important economic partner of the African continent.
Now, how to understand this, I think, is going to be a very�you know,
it�s going to be a complex process. Generally,
Westerners react by saying, �Ah, maybe this is a new form of
colonialism.� And it may be that there will be elements of similarity.
We should go back to something that, as Westerners, we�re entirely
unfamiliar with, which is the tributary state period, which was the
way in which China organized its relations with East Asia for well
over 2,000 years and only came to an end a hundred years ago...
For thirty years, ever since 1978, the Chinese economy has been
growing at around about ten percent a year, which is phenomenal. The
Chinese economy, in size, has been doubling every seven years. And it
also means that Chinese living standards have been proportionately
transformed. So, if you go to any of the big Chinese cities, and
notably Shanghai, Beijing and so on, you�ll see a very-in many ways,
very developed cities. But, of course, China is very diverse, so half
the population still lives in the countryside, and many people are
poor.
This transformation has meant that China has been responsible for more
than half the reduction in global poverty over the last thirty years.
So this is the most remarkable economic transformation in human
history.
-------------------------------------
Now, one of the problems is the West finds it, I think, very difficult
to understand the process that�s taken place. It�s had an agenda for
China, as it has an agenda for other countries, and it�s felt that
China should be more like us. Or this process-I mean, both the Clinton
and the Bush presidencies were informed by the idea that China�s
modernization would be a process of Westernization, in which China
would end up, in terms of political system, media and so on, like us.
And it hasn�t. It hasn�t. And I think this is raising a big question
for Western leaders, which is, so maybe China will not inevitably
become like us-in my opinion, it will not, because a country is shaped
not just by markets and technology and so on, but also by its history
and its culture. And this is something that Western hubris is not good
at addressing, because historically, for 200 years, we�ve always
thought that ultimately other cultures will bend to our will and
become like us, because we are the state of the art. And this will not
be true in relationship to China. It�s an illusion. And while this
illusion persists, our understanding of China will be limited.
We�ve made so many predictions about what would happen to China over
this period that have been wrong. You know, after Tiananmen Square,
China would divide. The Chinese Communist Party would wither away or
collapse like the Soviet Communist Party did after the fall of the
Berlin Wall. Didn�t happen. They offered-when Hong Kong was handed
over by Britain to Hong Kong-to China, China said, �One country, two
systems.� We said-we didn�t believe it. They meant it. They meant it.
It is one country, two systems. So, another prediction: the economic
growth would not last. It has lasted. So we�ve got China wrong in so
many ways. We need to rethink how we understand China, because it�s
never going to be a Western-style country.
This is a new phenomenon because we�ve never had before a developing
country becoming one of the world�s biggest economies. Hitherto in the
Western world of the last 200 years, since the British Industrial
Revolution started in 1780, every country which has been top dog has
been�had a big economy and a very high standard of living, every�
Britain, Germany, France and, of course, the US. Now we�re in a
different situation, where the biggest economies in the world are
increasingly going to be very populist countries, and therefore
they�ll have big economies, but they will also have a relatively lower
standard of living. This is a new situation.
The question of human rights, in general has improved a lot in this
area. I mean, you know, developing countries have everywhere very
mixed reputations in these terms, because the whole issue of
development out of poverty and so on, you know, it�s an authoritarian
life that people lead. They don�t have choices in the way that we
enjoy choices in the West. And so, China has had a very indifferent
human rights record. But so has India, by the way, and that�s a
Day Brown
very same cultural distinctions cited for China preclude its adoption.
Secondly, we have another example of a transnational free market to look
at in the Silk Road towns beyond the Jade Gate and Chinese Hegemony. The
region was often garrisoned by Chinese troops, but with the velvet glove
in the common interest in putting down banditry.
The journey of Xuan Zang, in the 7th century at the behest of Tang
Tizong, which begins with him spending 6 months at Kucha, is
instructive. We see here the respect by Chinese scholars of Aryan
writings and culture. The texts Xuan Zang was sent to get were written
in Tocharian, Sanskrit, or other ARYAN languages.
But by the same token, Kucha was a major source of translations from the
Chinese of Confucian and Toaist texts. Kuchan graveyards also show us
Chinese bodies dressed in Aryan clothes with the same quality Aryan
grave goods.
Of course, China will always respect its ancient traditions, and Aryans
will always respect ancient Aryan traditions. but in that tradition we
see the mutual respect they had for each other. "separate but equal".
This notion that China will impose its vision to replace the Aryan is
bullshit. Both are too civilized.
We hear a lot about miscegenation. But when Chinese and Aryans marry,
neither family worries about how the kids will work out. Everyone knows
this kind of half breed does well. This is not new either. If you parse
out the names of leaders in the Tang, you realize many are Aryan.
EW Barber, "The Mummies of Urumchi" says that all the way back to the
Shang, the royal courts hired Aryan astrologers, magicians, & scholars.
And while European/Biblical history reports that the wise men, the Magi,
came from "The East", in China, the wise men, the "Ma-ag" came from "The
West". Kucha is the home of what we know as the 'Magi'. But what else
would we expect of a city that had the teachings of sages in Levantine,
Buddhist, Taoist, Zoroastrian, and Confucian traditions?
Giga
"ZerkonXXXX" <Z...@erkonx.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2009.11...@erkonx.net...
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:23:17 -0800, Immortalist wrote:
>
>> And I would expect Mandarin to become, over the next fifty years, a
>> second language in the region, alongside English, maybe usurping English
>> in the longer run.
>
> China will also have the largest English speaking population in the world!
> Add in India...
Good point.
James A. Donald
> progressively going to come to an end, as China becomes more and more
> influential. This is already happening in certain parts of the world,
> much more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
> shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
China is not a cultural powerhouse, the way the US or Japan is,
because of the dead hand of the communist party.
How then, you may ask, can a country that is still in substantial part
a command economy have a vibrant economy?
The answer is, the dynamic and growing part of the chinese economy is
run by overseas chinese through companies whose server computers are
located in tax havens. The Chinese economy depends on tax havens -
something that the leadership finds hard to believe, and is not
comfortable with.
The overseas capitalist elite is chinese, but they often have western
names, and are heavily influenced by western culture.
We are seeing not so much the rise of China, but the rise of globalism
in which China is by far the largest player.
For a long time, the greatest threat to capitalism has been the
ignorant and envious destructiveness of the masses, leading to
economic stagnation and poverty as in Argentina, but recently in the
US and Japan we see a new threat - the economic elite demands and gets
political intervention to end creative destruction, to lock the
existing rich in place, with the government guaranteeing that stupid
rich people cannot be parted from their money, that losers cannot
lose, which has the unintended side effect of guaranteeing that
winners cannot win. There is in America today a shortage of new
businesses, resulting in a shortage of new jobs, a direct consequence
of the government guaranteeing so many old businesses in an entirely
unsuccessful effort to protect old jobs.
Only the globalist economy, largely run by Chinese, run through tax
havens, remains outside the reach of this dead hand.
Rod Speed
> That seems reasonable. China has one trillion people.
Nope, a billion.
> The United States has 300 million people. As a result, for the United States to stay ahead of the game, their people
> would need to outpace the people of China by a three to one margin.
Wrong, as always.
The US stayed ahead of the game till now without doing that.
> "Immortalist" <reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:d317fe6f-5ef8-45fb...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> With the rise of the developing world comes the relative decline of
> the developed world, the rich world.
>
> The rise of China is projected to overtake the size of the American
> economy around 2027. And by 2050, the Chinese economy will be twice
> the size of that of the American economy.
>
> This will fundamentally shift the economic center of gravity in the
> world and will have also profound political and cultural implications.
>
> There�s been a funny old assumption in the West somehow that China�s
> rise is just an economic story but the rise of a new global power
> always ushers in the expression of a much more comprehensive
> political, cultural, intellectual, military, moral influence, and this
> will in time happen in China.
>
> America will get richer, as other Western countries will get richer.
> But it will no longer shape the world, as it has in the last sixty
> years, or the West, in general.
>
> For 200 years, we�ve lived in a Western-shaped world. That era is
> progressively going to come to an end, as China becomes more and more
> influential. This is already happening in certain parts of the world,
> much more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
> shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
>
> For example, the rise of Mandarin in the region; It�s already a
> compulsory language in several countries-Thailand, for example, and
> South Korea. And I would expect Mandarin to become, over the next
> fifty years, a second language in the region, alongside English, maybe
> usurping English in the longer run.
>
> East Asia is home to one-third of the world�s population, and it�s
> already the largest economic region in the world. It�s bigger than
> North America, and it�s bigger than Europe.
>
> China is not really even a nation state in any conventional sense.
> We�re so used to thinking of countries as nation states. They arrived
> at something which isn�t really a conventional nation state. It�s
> really a civilization state, which thinks and acts in a completely
> different way to the way in which Western states have operated. So
> this kind of-the Chinese way of thinking will become-will begin to
> permeate those areas of the world in which it-with which it comes into
> contact.
>
> China has become extremely active, proactive with many regions. Latin
> America is one example, but the most dramatic, in a way, is Africa,
> which is a very short period of time. China is really becoming very
> rapidly the most important economic partner of the African continent.
>
> Now, how to understand this, I think, is going to be a very�you know,
> it�s going to be a complex process. Generally,
>
> Westerners react by saying, �Ah, maybe this is a new form of
> colonialism.� And it may be that there will be elements of similarity.
> We should go back to something that, as Westerners, we�re entirely
> unfamiliar with, which is the tributary state period, which was the
> way in which China organized its relations with East Asia for well
> over 2,000 years and only came to an end a hundred years ago...
>
> For thirty years, ever since 1978, the Chinese economy has been
> growing at around about ten percent a year, which is phenomenal. The
> Chinese economy, in size, has been doubling every seven years. And it
> also means that Chinese living standards have been proportionately
> transformed. So, if you go to any of the big Chinese cities, and
> notably Shanghai, Beijing and so on, you�ll see a very-in many ways,
> very developed cities. But, of course, China is very diverse, so half
> the population still lives in the countryside, and many people are
> poor.
>
> This transformation has meant that China has been responsible for more
> than half the reduction in global poverty over the last thirty years.
> So this is the most remarkable economic transformation in human
> history.
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> Now, one of the problems is the West finds it, I think, very difficult
> to understand the process that�s taken place. It�s had an agenda for
> China, as it has an agenda for other countries, and it�s felt that
> China should be more like us. Or this process-I mean, both the Clinton
> and the Bush presidencies were informed by the idea that China�s
> modernization would be a process of Westernization, in which China
> would end up, in terms of political system, media and so on, like us.
> And it hasn�t. It hasn�t. And I think this is raising a big question
> for Western leaders, which is, so maybe China will not inevitably
> become like us-in my opinion, it will not, because a country is shaped
> not just by markets and technology and so on, but also by its history
> and its culture. And this is something that Western hubris is not good
> at addressing, because historically, for 200 years, we�ve always
> thought that ultimately other cultures will bend to our will and
> become like us, because we are the state of the art. And this will not
> be true in relationship to China. It�s an illusion. And while this
> illusion persists, our understanding of China will be limited.
>
> We�ve made so many predictions about what would happen to China over
> this period that have been wrong. You know, after Tiananmen Square,
> China would divide. The Chinese Communist Party would wither away or
> collapse like the Soviet Communist Party did after the fall of the
> Berlin Wall. Didn�t happen. They offered-when Hong Kong was handed
> over by Britain to Hong Kong-to China, China said, �One country, two
> systems.� We said-we didn�t believe it. They meant it. They meant it.
> It is one country, two systems. So, another prediction: the economic
> growth would not last. It has lasted. So we�ve got China wrong in so
> many ways. We need to rethink how we understand China, because it�s
> never going to be a Western-style country.
>
> This is a new phenomenon because we�ve never had before a developing
> country becoming one of the world�s biggest economies. Hitherto in the
> Western world of the last 200 years, since the British Industrial
> Revolution started in 1780, every country which has been top dog has
> been�had a big economy and a very high standard of living, every�
> Britain, Germany, France and, of course, the US. Now we�re in a
> different situation, where the biggest economies in the world are
> increasingly going to be very populist countries, and therefore
> they�ll have big economies, but they will also have a relatively lower
> standard of living. This is a new situation.
>
> The question of human rights, in general has improved a lot in this
> area. I mean, you know, developing countries have everywhere very
> mixed reputations in these terms, because the whole issue of
> development out of poverty and so on, you know, it�s an authoritarian
> life that people lead. They don�t have choices in the way that we
> enjoy choices in the West. And so, China has had a very indifferent
> human rights record. But so has India, by the way, and that�s a
Rod Speed
> Immortalist wrote
>> For 200 years, we've lived in a Western-shaped world. That era is
>> progressively going to come to an end, as China becomes more and
>> more influential. This is already happening in certain parts of the world,
>> much more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
>> shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
> China is not a cultural powerhouse, the way the US or Japan is,
Japan isnt either except arguably with games consoles.
> because of the dead hand of the communist party.
They didnt manage much at all in real science
even before the communist party every showed up.
Like the romans, they did pretty well with engineering,
but not with rigorous science and medicine.
> How then, you may ask, can a country that is still in substantial
> part a command economy have a vibrant economy?
By getting the command part right, stupid.
Particularly by doing just what the Japs did too, maintain a currency
which is substantially undervalued compared with the USD and in the
case of china, by loosely locking the RMB to the USD.
Once the communist party had enough of a clue to notice that capitalism
works a hell of a lot better than communism, thats all it takes when you
have a crew like the chinese that make capitalism work so well.
> The answer is, the dynamic and growing part of the chinese
> economy is run by overseas chinese through companies
> whose server computers are located in tax havens.
Fuck all of it is in fact.
> The Chinese economy depends on tax havens
Like hell it does.
> - something that the leadership finds hard to believe,
Because its a lie.
> and is not comfortable with.
> The overseas capitalist elite is chinese, but they often have
> western names, and are heavily influenced by western culture.
Those aint the reason the china is booming.
> We are seeing not so much the rise of China, but the rise
> of globalism in which China is by far the largest player.
If it was that simple, India would be doing as well as china, and it aint.
> For a long time, the greatest threat to capitalism has been the
> ignorant and envious destructiveness of the masses, leading to
> economic stagnation and poverty as in Argentina, but recently
> in the US and Japan we see a new threat - the economic elite
> demands and gets political intervention to end creative destruction,
> to lock the existing rich in place, with the government guaranteeing
> that stupid rich people cannot be parted from their money, that
> losers cannot lose, which has the unintended side effect of
> guaranteeing that winners cannot win.
That aint what happened with Japan.
Or the US either.
> There is in America today a shortage of new
> businesses, resulting in a shortage of new jobs,
There wasnt until the GFC. The unemployment rate bottommed
at 4.x% with an immense legal and illegal immigration rate.
> a direct consequence of the government guaranteeing so many old
> businesses in an entirely unsuccessful effort to protect old jobs.
How odd that the unemployment rate bottommed at
4.x% with an immense legal and illegal immigration rate.
> Only the globalist economy, largely run by Chinese, run through
> tax havens, remains outside the reach of this dead hand.
Just another of your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasys.
Immortalist
ho...@yahoo.co> wrote:
> "Immortalist" <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
>
> For 200 years, we’ve lived in a Western-shaped world. That era is
> progressively going to come to an end, as China becomes more and more
> influential.
>
> =Except China is already very influenced by some western ideas, but sure
> will bring a philosophical breath of very fresh air hopefully.
>
> This is already happening in certain parts of the world,
> much more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
> shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
>
> For example, the rise of Mandarin in the region; It’s already a
> compulsory language in several countries-Thailand,
>
> =What! Got a reference for that?
>
As Guan put it in his speech, a "wave of Mandarin learning" is
burgeoning in Thailand, with 1,105 schools and colleges across the
kingdom having introduced Mandarin courses and a total of 400,000 Thai
people studying the language in diversified ways.
Mandarin at Ascot: The growing importance of China in this region has
made this language choice very popular.
http://www.ascot.ac.th/3_foreign_languages_mandarin.php
Chinese Singaporeans urged to speak Mandarin as common language;
Singapore's Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said that Mandarin has to be
the common language of Chinese Singaporeans, regardless of their
dialect groups. Lee said that the trend is clear, in two generations,
Mandarin will become our mother tongue.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-03/18/content_11028547.htm
Immortalist
> but.html
>
> ------------------------
>
> China is as volatile as any other country. What has really changed as far
> as China and the West is concerned is in ages past when China moved the
> rest of the world was pretty much buffered, today is most decidedly is
> not.
>
> and this crap:
>
> "End of Western World & The Birth of New Global Order "
>
> Is only crap-speak. The thing possibly ending, thankfully, is cultural
> myopia and this screwed up, self defeating, always failing perspective of
> 'world domination'.
I am working on a graded scale of historical examples of proportional
degrees of equality vs liberty. Some States have to much freedom and
some to little, but China has a system of laws that apparently work
better than those in the USA and Russia. That is the level of trust if
social contracts is greater in some countries than other because of
the ability to actually enforce the laws required for a harmonious
politic.
Russia is increasing their laws and becoming more autocratic in an
attempt to be like China which has been on the right path. China has
nearly succeeded in creating a system of laws that are making it safe
for free enterprise or capitalism to work and soon they will begin
turning their system into a true liberal democrat system in the proper
fashion. Russia moved to Democracy to fast and must step back and make
a "rule of law" that creates a safe environment for capital and a
hazardous environment for anarchaic capital in the form of organized
crime.
Russia's move back "towards" autocracy only would appear bad to
Eurocentric and Americentric viewpoints.
Rod Speed
> Giga <"Giga" <just(removetheseandaddmatthe end) ho...@yahoo.co> wrote
>> Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> For 200 years, we�ve lived in a Western-shaped world. That era is progressively
>>> going to come to an end, as China becomes more and more influential.
>> Except China is already very influenced by some western ideas,
>> but sure will bring a philosophical breath of very fresh air hopefully.
>>> This is already happening in certain parts of the world, much
>>> more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
>>> shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
>>> For example, the rise of Mandarin in the region; It�s already
>>> a compulsory language in several countries-Thailand,
>> What! Got a reference for that?
> As Guan put it in his speech, a "wave of Mandarin learning" is
> burgeoning in Thailand, with 1,105 schools and colleges across
> the kingdom having introduced Mandarin courses and a total of
> 400,000 Thai people studying the language in diversified ways.
Thats not saying its COMPULSORY in Thailand.
> Mandarin at Ascot: The growing importance of China
> in this region has made this language choice very popular.
> http://www.ascot.ac.th/3_foreign_languages_mandarin.php
Thats not saying its COMPULSORY there either.
> Chinese Singaporeans urged to speak Mandarin as common language;
> Singapore's Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said that Mandarin has to
> be the common language of Chinese Singaporeans, regardless of their
> dialect groups. Lee said that the trend is clear, in two generations,
> Mandarin will become our mother tongue.
> http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-03/18/content_11028547.htm
Thats not saying its COMPULSORY there either.
And its hardly surprising that a country which is completely dominated
by the chinese would have an emphasis on a chinese language.
>>> for example, and South Korea.
Mandarin aint COMPULSORY there either.
>>> And I would expect Mandarin to become, over the next fifty years, a second
>>> language in the region, alongside English, maybe usurping English in the longer run.
Not a chance, essentially because its MUCH harder than english.
>>> East Asia is home to one-third of the world�s population, and it�s
>>> already the largest economic region in the world. It�s bigger than
>>> North America, and it�s bigger than Europe.
It always was. Doesnt mean that Mandarin will be used much by anyone else.
Rod Speed
Like hell they do.
> That is the level of trust if social contracts is greater in some countries than other
> because of the ability to actually enforce the laws required for a harmonious politic.
Try telling that to Falongong supporters. Dont be TOO surprised when they just laugh in your face.
> Russia is increasing their laws and becoming
> more autocratic in an attempt to be like China
Like hell they are.
> which has been on the right path. China has nearly
> succeeded in creating a system of laws that are making
> it safe for free enterprise or capitalism to work
Try telling that to Stern Hu. Dont be TOO surprised when he just laughs in your face.
> and soon they will begin turning their system into a
> true liberal democrat system in the proper fashion.
Not a chance. They havent even done that in HongKong.
> Russia moved to Democracy to fast and must step back and make
> a "rule of law" that creates a safe environment for capital and a
> hazardous environment for anarchaic capital in the form of organized crime.
> Russia's move back "towards" autocracy only would
> appear bad to Eurocentric and Americentric viewpoints.
Even sillier.
Giga
On Nov 24, 11:59 pm, "Giga" <"Giga" <just(removetheseandaddmatthe end)
ho...@yahoo.co> wrote:
> "Immortalist" <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
>
> For 200 years, we�ve lived in a Western-shaped world. That era is
> progressively going to come to an end, as China becomes more and more
> influential.
>
> =Except China is already very influenced by some western ideas, but sure
> will bring a philosophical breath of very fresh air hopefully.
>
> This is already happening in certain parts of the world,
> much more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
> shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
>
> For example, the rise of Mandarin in the region; It�s already a
> compulsory language in several countries-Thailand,
>
> =What! Got a reference for that?
>
As Guan put it in his speech, a "wave of Mandarin learning" is
burgeoning in Thailand, with 1,105 schools and colleges across the
kingdom having introduced Mandarin courses and a total of 400,000 Thai
people studying the language in diversified ways.
Mandarin at Ascot: The growing importance of China in this region has
made this language choice very popular.
http://www.ascot.ac.th/3_foreign_languages_mandarin.php
=That is a way from compulsory still. However 1000 'volunteers', means paid
for by the Chinese state probably. It is a great thing if the majority of
Thais get any language education, or much modern education at all. English
is notoriously poor in that country, especially compared to the others
around it and considerring the importance of tourism. Maybe Thais are more
culturally sympathetic to Chinese, not sure. I gwt thw impression that many
have little respect or liking for Westerners or Western culture.
Chinese Singaporeans urged to speak Mandarin as common language;
Singapore's Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said that Mandarin has to be
the common language of Chinese Singaporeans, regardless of their
dialect groups. Lee said that the trend is clear, in two generations,
Mandarin will become our mother tongue.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-03/18/content_11028547.htm
=I know a few Singaporean Chinese, they speak a variety of Chinese dialects,
totally different than Manadarin. Often they speak good Manadarin or
Cantonese as well. Nearly all below 60 speak practically perfect English.
Even more so they are culturally very very Westernised. They even call
themselves 'bananas': yellow on the outside, white on the inside. And I have
to say that is very much my own impression. Whether Mandarin will be their
primary language in 50 years I'm not sure. Perhaps both English and
Mandarin, the great thing about language is the more you learn the easier
they are to pick up, generally. They are not competing. Culturally I think
it will be a different story.
Giga
=Wow, it almost seems you have swallowed the propaganda line! Are you in
China atm? Or been there recently. It may be paranoia but I have noticed
what seems to me undue influence on people's thinking who have been there.
Hard to know of course. But the thing I notice is strange language forms
being used by them. 'Eurocentric and Americentric viewpoints' would be a
good example, 'anarchaic capital' another.
Giga
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b0d7389$0$8770$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
My experience with Chinese people is that they tend to fall in to two
extremes when it comes to their attitude to Western culture. Either they
love it or hate it, the MArmite approach to culture. I think this is a sign
of misunderstanding and unfamiliarity, and a more nuanced view will develope
geenrally. Including that age-old piece of reason 'we're all human after
all'.
Giga
"James A. Donald" <jam...@echeque.com> wrote in message
news:v38qg5lk5galn6gjo...@4ax.com...
Very true in my experience. Its also amazing how much Taiwan has contributed
to the Chinese growth. Their arch enemy has given them the gift of wealth.
zzbunker
> With the rise of the developing world comes the relative decline of
> the developed world, the rich world.
>
> The rise of China is projected to overtake the size of the American
> economy around 2027. And by 2050, the Chinese economy will be twice
> the size of that of the American economy.
>
> This will fundamentally shift the economic center of gravity in the
> world and will have also profound political and cultural implications.
>
> There’s been a funny old assumption in the West somehow that China’s
> rise is just an economic story but the rise of a new global power
> always ushers in the expression of a much more comprehensive
> political, cultural, intellectual, military, moral influence, and this
> will in time happen in China.
>
> America will get richer, as other Western countries will get richer.
> But it will no longer shape the world, as it has in the last sixty
> years, or the West, in general.
That can't fail to happen. Since all the derivates cranks still
have their
unlimited blind faith in Pharmo Companies to fix anything.
> http://www.democracynow.org/2009/11/19/shunning_dissidents_obama_leav...http://www.democracynow.org/
Rod Speed
Taiwan aint a tax haven.
ZerkonXXXX
> China is not a cultural powerhouse,
Sometimes somethings just need to be savored....
Jerry Okamura
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7n5goqF...@mid.individual.net...
> Jerry Okamura wrote
>
>> That seems reasonable. China has one trillion people.
>
> Nope, a billion.
Sorry about that. Should have put my brain in gear frist.
>
>> The United States has 300 million people. As a result, for the United
>> States to stay ahead of the game, their people would need to outpace the
>> people of China by a three to one margin.
>
> Wrong, as always.
>
> The US stayed ahead of the game till now without doing that.
>
Without doing what?
Day Brown
> My experience with Chinese people is that they tend to fall in to two
> extremes when it comes to their attitude to Western culture. Either they
> love it or hate it, the MArmite approach to culture. I think this is a sign
> of misunderstanding and unfamiliarity, and a more nuanced view will develope
> geenrally. Including that age-old piece of reason 'we're all human after
> all'.
that effort, I look for Chinese films. They've seen plenty of Western flix.
I dont remember the name, but I saw what at first glance looks like
classic film noir, the dark nite, the dock, the rain on the
cobblestones, the yacht, then the Packard with a hood as long as a pool
table, wearing wide whites, pulls up and the tommy guns come out.
But soon enuf you realize its not Chicago, but Shanghai. The yacht is a
junk. All the thugs in double breasted pinstripes wear Chinese faces.
And only later did I find out its a remake of a Chinese opera. So, here
again we see Chinese take Aryan technology and then display a level of
craftsmanship that cant be called a 'copy'.
Wish I could find the movie. But if you see it, you'll remember.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> Jerry Okamura wrote
>>> That seems reasonable. China has one trillion people.
>> Nope, a billion.
> Sorry about that. Should have put my brain in gear frist.
Bit hard when all you have is ear to ear dog shit.
>>> The United States has 300 million people. As a result, for the
>>> United States to stay ahead of the game, their people would need to outpace the people of China by a three to one
>>> margin.
>> Wrong, as always.
>> The US stayed ahead of the game till now without doing that.
> Without doing what?
'outpace the people of China by a three to one margin', stupid.
James A. Donald
> >> havens, remains outside the reach of this dead hand.
Giga" <"Giga wrote:
> > Very true in my experience. Its also amazing how much Taiwan has
> > contributed to the Chinese growth. Their arch enemy has given them
> > the gift of wealth.
> Taiwan aint a tax haven.
Taiwanese, amongst others, run the Mainland Chinese economy, in large
part through tax havens such as Bermuda.
While someone using a tax haven to run a US business likes to use a
tax haven that is as far from the US sphere of influence as possible,
someone running a business in China likes to use a tax haven that is
as close inside the US sphere of influence as possible.
James A. Donald
> 5. In recent years, signs of societal breakdown have become more
> apparent. The core problem is the loss of control over power. During the
> past 30 years of reform, despite the establishment of a basic framework
> for a market economy, power remains the backbone of our society. Because
> societal breakdown first appears as the loss of control over power,
> corruption is but the surface manifestation. By loss of control over
> power I mean that power becomes a force unconstrained not only
> externally, but also internally. Before this, although it lacked external
> constraints, internal constraints had been relatively effective. The
> power base is weakening; several years ago we had already heard the
> saying "commands don’t reach outside of Zhongnanhai [the headquarters of
> the CCP and China’s Central Government]." Local power and sector power
> have become unconstrained from above and unmonitored from below, at the
> same time lacking any check or balance from the left or right. This is to
> say, state power is fragmented, and officials are unable to work
> responsibly. To preserve their positions they don't balk at sacrificing
> system benefits (not to mention societal interest). With this background,
> corruption has gotten beyond control and become untreatable.
I have long argued that corruption is a good thing. Corporations are
efficient and productive in large part because votes can be bought.
Why should not governments operate in the same fashion?
James A. Donald
> China has
> nearly succeeded in creating a system of laws that are making it safe
> for free enterprise or capitalism to work
I do not think so.
: : In a country where the rule of law is
: : subservient to political power and the
: : development of commercial law remains
: : rudimentary, abduction -- essentially
: : hostage-taking -- is a time-honoured method
: : of resolving contract disputes, or of easing
: : the foreign partner out of a joint venture.
: :
: : Numbers are hard to come by, but there have
: : been many reports from China of
: : business-related abductions in recent months
: : stemming from the global recession.
<http://news.google.com/news/search?as_epq=Stern+Hu>
Rather, capitalism works in China because the laws are
evaded by corruption and by running businesses through
tax havens.
China's dramatic growth comes not because they have
become effectual in doing something right, but because
they have become ineffectual in doing something wrong -
communism collapsed as in Russia, but unlike Russia, was
not replaced by a new system. The dead hand of the
communist party is now too weak to prevent capitalism,
but strong enough to prevent new political coalitions
from arising to prevent capitalism.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Giga" <"Giga wrote
>>> James A. Donald <jam...@echeque.com> wrote
>>>> Only the globalist economy, largely run by Chinese, run through
>>>> tax havens, remains outside the reach of this dead hand.
>>> Very true in my experience. Its also amazing how much Taiwan has
>>> contributed to the Chinese growth. Their arch enemy has given them
>>> the gift of wealth.
>> Taiwan aint a tax haven.
> Taiwanese, amongst others, run the Mainland Chinese economy,
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
> in large part through tax havens such as Bermuda.
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
> While someone using a tax haven to run a US business likes to use a
> tax haven that is as far from the US sphere of influence as possible,
> someone running a business in China likes to use a tax haven that is
> as close inside the US sphere of influence as possible.
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
Rod Speed
> ZerkonXXXX <Z...@erkonx.net> wrote
>> 5. In recent years, signs of societal breakdown have become more
>> apparent. The core problem is the loss of control over power. During
>> the past 30 years of reform, despite the establishment of a basic
>> framework for a market economy, power remains the backbone of our
>> society. Because societal breakdown first appears as the loss of
>> control over power, corruption is but the surface manifestation. By
>> loss of control over power I mean that power becomes a force
>> unconstrained not only externally, but also internally. Before this,
>> although it lacked external constraints, internal constraints had
>> been relatively effective. The power base is weakening; several
>> years ago we had already heard the saying "commands don't reach
>> outside of Zhongnanhai [the headquarters of the CCP and China's
>> Central Government]." Local power and sector power have become
>> unconstrained from above and unmonitored from below, at the same
>> time lacking any check or balance from the left or right. This is to
>> say, state power is fragmented, and officials are unable to work
>> responsibly. To preserve their positions they don't balk at
>> sacrificing system benefits (not to mention societal interest). With
>> this background, corruption has gotten beyond control and become
>> untreatable.
> I have long argued that corruption is a good thing.
No surprises there, you have always been a terminal fuckwit.
> Corporations are efficient and productive in large part because votes can be bought.
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
> Why should not governments operate in the same fashion?
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
Rod Speed
> Immortalist wrote
>> China has nearly succeeded in creating a system of laws that
>> are making it safe for free enterprise or capitalism to work
> I do not think so.
>>> In a country where the rule of law is
>>> subservient to political power and the
>>> development of commercial law remains
>>> rudimentary, abduction -- essentially
>>> hostage-taking -- is a time-honoured method
>>> of resolving contract disputes, or of easing
>>> the foreign partner out of a joint venture.
>>> Numbers are hard to come by, but there have
>>> been many reports from China of
>>> business-related abductions in recent months
>>> stemming from the global recession.
> <http://news.google.com/news/search?as_epq=Stern+Hu>
> Rather, capitalism works in China because the laws are evaded by corruption
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
> and by running businesses through tax havens.
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
> China's dramatic growth comes not because they have
> become effectual in doing something right, but because
> they have become ineffectual in doing something wrong
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
> communism collapsed as in Russia, but unlike Russia, was
> not replaced by a new system. The dead hand of the
> communist party is now too weak to prevent capitalism,
> but strong enough to prevent new political coalitions
> from arising to prevent capitalism.
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
Me, again!
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Rod Speed wrote:
> James A. Donald wrote
>> Immortalist wrote
>
>>> China has nearly succeeded in creating a system of laws that
>>> are making it safe for free enterprise or capitalism to work
>
>> I do not think so.
>
>> <http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Kidnappings+Chinese+solution+commercial+contract+disputes/2227461/story.html>
>
>>>> In a country where the rule of law is
>>>> subservient to political power and the
>>>> development of commercial law remains
>>>> rudimentary, abduction -- essentially
>>>> hostage-taking -- is a time-honoured method
>>>> of resolving contract disputes, or of easing
>>>> the foreign partner out of a joint venture.
>
>>>> Numbers are hard to come by, but there have
>>>> been many reports from China of
>>>> business-related abductions in recent months
>>>> stemming from the global recession.
>
>> <http://news.google.com/news/search?as_epq=Stern+Hu>
>
>> Rather, capitalism works in China because the laws are evaded by corruption
>
> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
I, Rod Speed, am a gutless fuckwit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a human, desperately cowering behind
my ass, desperately attempted to bullshit and lie my way out of
my predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
No surprise that I got the bums rush, right out the door, onto my lard
arse.
No surprise that I'm so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.
Me, again!
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Rod Speed wrote:
the Rod Speed poem:
There once was a bloke known as Rod Speed
Of course, but no one would heed
He was, of course, just a big
Flaming Blow-Hard Asshole
He huffed and puffed
Implied that only he knew the truth
That all others lied, ignoranted, etc.
And, he recycled all of his mirth
And, so he blew hard the flames as follows
Such wonderful examples of logical falacies and hollow
Ad hominems, and many other examples of diversions
Plays, ploys, plys, spins, and evasions from he
"No one ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that."
"Just another of your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasys."
"He's just another pig ignorant fool. No surprise that you 'think' that
the sun shines out of his arse."
"Like hell it does."
"Just another of your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasys."
"Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had
a fucking clue about anything at all, ever."
And so one person wrote an FAQ about Rod Speed
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.internet.wireless/
2006-07/msg00462.html
(be careful about the line break if you copy and past)
That FAQ was written way before my meeting of Rod Speed
And, how should we think about Rod Speed?
Is he mentally ill?
Be glad he is not in the White House?
Treat him with humor instead of seriousness?
Nah, just watch him huff and puff
And blow himself to bits
And be entertained and give applause
And, ask for an encore
Rod Speed
own lines, or anything else at all either, with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Me, again! desperately attempted to bullshit and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.
No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.
Rod Speed
Giga
I've seen a few Chinese/Hong Kong films and found them to be very good, even
having to read subtitles. I'm sure if you speak the relevant language it is
just as good as Western cinema.
Giga
> "James A. Donald" <jam...@echeque.com> wrote in message
>> >> Only the globalist economy, largely run by Chinese, run through tax
>> >> havens, remains outside the reach of this dead hand.
>
> Giga" <"Giga wrote:
>> > Very true in my experience. Its also amazing how much Taiwan has
>> > contributed to the Chinese growth. Their arch enemy has given them
>> > the gift of wealth.
>
>
>> Taiwan aint a tax haven.
AFAIU Taiwan owns loads of factories on mainland China, whether those
Taiwanese companies use offshore structures I'm not sure.
Day Brown
> I've seen a few Chinese/Hong Kong films and found them to be very good, even
> having to read subtitles. I'm sure if you speak the relevant language it is
> just as good as Western cinema.
nuances of meaning that go right over the heads of English speakers, and
English, never mind the writing, is so much easier to learn.
The film noir Chinese opera was spelled out in the action and body
language so well that the only thing you need to be told is that the
Junk is full of opium.
Come to think of it, maybe they know because so much of their video has
a silent film era feel to it. But I bet, that since both East Asian and
West European bloodlines descend from 10,000+ years as farmers, there
are sets of gesture and body language we both understand that go right
over the heads of those descended from hunting and herding lineages.
The New Global Order will be run by the descendants of yeoman farmers
just as it was so far invented by them, be they East or West.
Les Cargill
I am not so sure. According to Lee Kuan Yew* on Charlie
Rose, he directly spoke to Deng Xiao Peng and Deng
made a conscious decision based on those conversations
to try to adapt-in free market policies to improve the
lot of the Chinese
*the eternal prime minister of Singapore.
Maybe the story is bogus, but his eyes were serious when
he said it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNhcOwhpR1E
To me, this was an act of frank moral courage on the
part of Deng, and a nexus point on a par with the shift
of the balance of power from Sparta to Athens in the
classical world. I hope that isn't hyperbolic, but
China opening up to the rest of the world is a major,
major thing. We are all brothers under the skin, and
better brothers in trade than brothers at arms. It has
certainly moved China from a stagnant if not declining
power into the rising power category.
--
Les Cargill
Rod Speed
> Giga <Giga wrote
>> I've seen a few Chinese/Hong Kong films and found them to be very
>> good, even having to read subtitles. I'm sure if you speak the
>> relevant language it is just as good as Western cinema.
> Come to think of it, that is a problem they have. Their language has
> nuances of meaning that go right over the heads of English speakers,
> and English, never mind the writing, is so much easier to learn.
> The film noir Chinese opera was spelled out in the action and body
> language so well that the only thing you need to be told is that the
> Junk is full of opium.
> Come to think of it, maybe they know because so much of their video has a silent film era feel to it. But I bet, that
> since both East
> Asian and West European bloodlines descend from 10,000+ years as farmers, there are sets of gesture and body language
> we both
> understand that go right over the heads of those descended from
> hunting and herding lineages.
Been having those pathetic little fantasys long ?
> The New Global Order will be run by the descendants of yeoman farmers
Only in your pathetic little drug crazed cripple fantasyland.
> just as it was so far invented by them, be they East or West.
Only in your pathetic little drug crazed cripple fantasyland.
Les Cargill
Well, rock and roll *was* better when there was payola. Same thing.
"Put your money where your mouth is", the saying goes....
Indeed. What we were taught was "corrupt" is what Hearst and Teddy
Roosevelt ( who found the Hearst parade and jumped in front of it )
said was "corrupt" - meaning "in competition with Hearst".
The original, Boss Tweed style democracy provided a voice to the
least of a city if they had something to say. Organized crime was
the reaction to this disenfranchisement, particularly of immigrants
who had no other voice.
The last bastion of this was in the Midwest, with Truman's embrace
by the Pendergast machine and ... Chicago, which gave us Obama. Much
of what he resonated with is that, of direct access populist
democracy. They mighta' been sum'itches, but they was *OUR* sum'itches.
Much pain is caused by people thinking "money is the root of all evil",
when it's "*The love of* money is the root of all evil", as in
obsession.
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
If I were Chinese, I would think that China, being the oldest
continuously operated civilization around today, was a pretty
cool place, and that being Chinese would be better than being
"a barbarian."
--
Les Cargill
Gutless Fuckwit
OK, what will it be this time? See below....
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Rod Speed wrote:
Bingo, the Rod Speed FAQ:
The "Rod Speed FAQ" read it below or at the URL for yourself.....
- - - - - - - - -
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.internet.wireless/2006-07/msg00462.html
- - - - - - - - - -
After its recent emergence in the thread "How to calculate increase
of home wireless router range?", readers of this group may find
this useful. [based on a post in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage]
Who or What is Rod Speed?
Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod
Speed is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered
he can enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the
big, hard man" on the InterNet.
Rod is believed to be from Australia.
Rod certainly posts a lot. Why is that?
It relates back to the point about boosting his own self esteem by
what amounts to effectively having a wank in public. Rod's
personality, as exemplified by his posts, means he is practically
unemployable which means he sits around at home all day festering
away and getting worse and worse. This means he posts more and
more try and boost the old failing self esteem. Being unemployed
also means he as a lot of time on his hands to post in he first
place.
But maybe Rod really is a very clever and knowledgable person?
Clever? His posts wouldn't support that theory. As far as being
knowledgable, well, Rod has posted to various aus newsgroups
including invest, comms, and politics. He has posted to all as a
self professed "expert" and flames any and all who disagree with
him. Logically, here's no way any single individual could be
more than a jack of all trades across such a wide spread of
subject matter.
But maybe Rod really is an expert in some areas?
Possibly. However, his "bedside manner" prevents him from being
taken seriously by most normal people. Also, he has damaged his
credibility in areas where he might know what he's on about by
shooting his self in the foot in areas where he does not. For
example, in the case of subject matter such as politics, even a
view held by Albert Einstein cannot be little more than an
opinion and to vociferously denigrate an opposing opinion is
simply small mindedness and bigotry, the kind of which Einstein
himself fought against his whole life.
What is Rod Speed's main modus operandi?
Simple! He shoots off a half brained opinion in response to any
other post and touts that opinion as fact. When challenged, he
responds with vociferous and rabid denigration. He has an
instantly recognisable set of schoolboy put downs limited pretty
much to the following: "Pathetic, Puerile, Little Boy, try
harder, trivial, more lies, gutless wonder, wanker, etc etc".
The fact that Rod has been unable to come up with any new insults
says a lot about his outlook and intelligence.
But why do so many people respond to Rod in turn?
It has to do with effrontery and a lack of logic. Most people
who post have some basis of reason for what they write and when
Rod retorts with his usual denigration and derision they respond
emotionally rather than logically. It's like a teacher in a
class room who has a misbehaving pupil. The teacher challenges
the pupil to explain himself and the student responds with "***
off, Big Nose!" Even thought the teacher has a fairly normal
proboscis, he gets a dent in his self-esteem and might resort to
an emotional repsonse like "yeah? well your *** wouldn't fill a
pop rivet, punk", which merely invites some oneupmanship from the
naughty pupil. Of course, the teacher should not have justified
the initial comment with a response, especially in front of the
class. The correct response was "please report to the
headmaster's office right NOW!"
What is a "RodBot"?
Some respondents in aus.invest built a "virtual Rod" which was
indiscernable from the "real" Rod. Net users could enter an
opinion or even a fact and the RoDBot would tell them they were
pathetic lying schoolboys who should be able to do better or some
equally pithy Rod Speedism.
Are you saying that Rod Speed is a Troll?
You got it!
What is the best way to handle Rod Speed?
KillFile!
.
>
Gutless Fuckwit
James A. Donald
> > China's dramatic growth comes not because they have
> > become effectual in doing something right, but
> > because they have become ineffectual in doing
> > something wrong - communism collapsed as in Russia,
> > but unlike Russia, was not replaced by a new system.
> > The dead hand of the communist party is now too weak
> > to prevent capitalism, but strong enough to prevent
> > new political coalitions from arising to prevent
> > capitalism.
Les Cargill
> I am not so sure. According to Lee Kuan Yew* on
> Charlie Rose, he directly spoke to Deng Xiao Peng and
> Deng made a conscious decision based on those
> conversations to try to adapt-in free market policies
> to improve the lot of the Chinese
This is indeed true - but lots of countries made that
conscious decision, and it worked considerably better
for China than many others.
The ex socialist country that most vigorously,
thoroughly, and completely decided to go capitalist is
Estonia, where they love capitalism primarily because
they hated communism, and so decided to go as far from
communism as they possibly could as soon as they dared.
They have done pretty well.
Lots of countries, however implemented the decision with
less than complete enthusiasm and thoroughness, and
their performance has mostly been considerably less
impressive than that of Estonia, with the exception of
China.
The solution to this paradox appears when you check out
the good stuff in Wallmart. It is made in China, but
not by companies headquartered in China.
> To me, this was an act of frank moral courage on the
> part of Deng, and a nexus point on a par with the
> shift of the balance of power from Sparta to Athens in
> the classical world.
That is true. It was a change that changed the world.
It is, however, also true that Chinese companies fear to
headquarter in China.
We have seen a near total disappearance of IPO's from
America. These days, companies also fear to headquarter
in America. Observe, however, that America is far more
effectual than China in attacking the use of tax havens
by Americans, thus this self strangulation is far more
damaging to America than to China. New jobs mostly come
from new companies. There are lots of new companies in
China, very few in America.
The only way out of this hole for the American
government is to let people run businesses through
lawsuit proof tax havens. Well, not the only way out of
this hole. Alternatively the American government could
remedy the lawlessness of regulators politicians,
courts, and lawyers, starting by sending a few hundred
judges to jail for several years each, which will happen
shortly after pigs fly.
zzbunker
Some do. But since most of the corporations are simply too corrupt
to understand that what they call efficiency is just another word
for papework,
and what they call productivity is just another word for
warehousing.
And governments are generally too moronic to understand that it
doesn't
matter how efficient bridges, they're not very productive. And it
doesn't matter
how producitve sunshine is, it's only efficient in regards to
geology.
>
> - Show quoted text -
Day Brown
> If I were Chinese, I would think that China, being the oldest
> continuously operated civilization around today, was a pretty
> cool place, and that being Chinese would be better than being
> "a barbarian."
projects only add to that. Course, like with the Great Wall, it remains
to be seen whether it'll actually work this time. The Grand Canal, a far
less obvious monument, has had far greater economic impact than any
other such infrastructure development anyplace else in the world.
Its worth noting too that the three Great Chinese religions, Buddhism,
Taoism, and Confucianism, have had less violence among them over the
course of the last 2500 years than the three Great Western Religions,
Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have had in the last 25. Just who is it
that is 'civilized' here?
As for Maoism, like with Germany and Hitler, they'd never really handed
that much control over to one person before, and didnt really know how
bad it could get. But as for 'barbarians', its either total tyranny or
total anarchy, one after the other as far back as we can see.
Rod Speed
> Les Cargill
>> James A. Donald wrote
>>> China's dramatic growth comes not because they
>>> have become effectual in doing something right,
>>> but because they have become ineffectual in doing
>>> something wrong - communism collapsed as in Russia,
>>> but unlike Russia, was not replaced by a new system.
>>> The dead hand of the communist party is now too weak
>>> to prevent capitalism, but strong enough to prevent
>>> new political coalitions from arising to prevent capitalism.
>> I am not so sure. According to Lee Kuan Yew* on
>> Charlie Rose, he directly spoke to Deng Xiao Peng
>> and Deng made a conscious decision based on those
>> conversations to try to adapt-in free market policies
>> to improve the lot of the Chinese
> This is indeed true - but lots of countries made that
> conscious decision, and it worked considerably better
> for China than many others.
Essentially because they had much lower wages than
anyone else of anything like that size, and had enough
of a clue to keep the RMB artificially undervalued
compared with the USD and had enough of a clue
keep providing the infrastructure that industry needs.
> The ex socialist country that most vigorously, thoroughly,
> and completely decided to go capitalist is Estonia,
Ex communist, not ex socialist. There are no ex socialist countrys.
> where they love capitalism primarily because they hated
> communism, and so decided to go as far from communism
> as they possibly could as soon as they dared.
> They have done pretty well.
Like hell they have with the GFC.
And nothing like as well as the scandinavian countrys have living standards wise.
> Lots of countries, however implemented the decision
> with less than complete enthusiasm and thoroughness,
> and their performance has mostly been considerably less
> impressive than that of Estonia, with the exception of China.
> The solution to this paradox appears when you check
> out the good stuff in Wallmart. It is made in China,
> but not by companies headquartered in China.
A hell of a lot of it is just that.
>> To me, this was an act of frank moral courage on the
>> part of Deng, and a nexus point on a par with the
>> shift of the balance of power from Sparta to Athens in
>> the classical world.
> That is true. It was a change that changed the world.
> It is, however, also true that Chinese companies fear to
> headquarter in China.
Hordes of them dont.
> We have seen a near total disappearance of IPO's from America.
Not for long. They've already appeared again in places like Australia
which didnt even get a recession as the result of the GFC.
> These days, companies also fear to headquarter in America.
Pure pig ignorant fantasy.
> Observe, however, that America is far more effectual than China
> in attacking the use of tax havens by Americans, thus this self
> strangulation is far more damaging to America than to China.
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
> New jobs mostly come from new companies.
> There are lots of new companies in
> China, very few in America.
How odd that the unemployment rate bottomed at 4.x% with
an immense legal and illegal immigration rate ANYWAY.
> The only way out of this hole for the American government is
> to let people run businesses through lawsuit proof tax havens.
How odd that the unemployment rate bottomed at 4.x% with
an immense legal and illegal immigration rate without that.
> Well, not the only way out of this hole. Alternatively the American
> government could remedy the lawlessness of regulators politicians,
> courts, and lawyers, starting by sending a few hundred judges to
> jail for several years each,
Completely off with the fucking fairys, as always.
Les Cargill
But China is still China - there's nothing
like freedom there.
> We have seen a near total disappearance of IPO's from
> America. These days, companies also fear to headquarter
> in America. Observe, however, that America is far more
> effectual than China in attacking the use of tax havens
> by Americans, thus this self strangulation is far more
> damaging to America than to China.
I'm simply unsure of any of that any more. This is just
IMO, but the main damage to IPOs came when Enron's
name was smeared - a great many IPO were in Texas
prior to that. When Enron became the horror it was,
there was no longer any advantage to using Texas.
The VC community is still Californian, and once
they became convinced that Texas was out of control,
that simply ended it. Ca costs too much, so they
went to China. Georgia held on for a while, but
that too failed.
The VC community .... lost itself in its own navel-gazing.
There at the end, it was very bizarre. VC would dictate
costs well above what they'd put in to start with. They'd
need a six or seven-figure CEO just for seed money.
And this shows - when Twitter is considered a real
company... maybe tech is just done.
> New jobs mostly come
> from new companies. There are lots of new companies in
> China, very few in America.
>
They're not very good jobs. They don't even return enough
to the general Chinese domestic economy to found any sort of
consumerism - and I mean *any* sort. There'll have to be an
ironically Maoist "plan" to implement consumerism.
China looks like New York City about the time of
the Triangle Shirtwaist fire, still. Most of the money
returned to bonds is excess *from companies*, not
pennies saved by working class Chinese. It's
all funny money.
> The only way out of this hole for the American
> government is to let people run businesses through
> lawsuit proof tax havens.
Not gonna happen. Say what you will of lawsuits,
they work.
> Well, not the only way out of
> this hole. Alternatively the American government could
> remedy the lawlessness of regulators politicians,
> courts, and lawyers, starting by sending a few hundred
> judges to jail for several years each, which will happen
> shortly after pigs fly.
>
The judges are just conforming to expectation.
--
Les Cargill
Rod Speed
Thats a pretty naive view with rigorous science and medicine alone.
James A. Donald
<lcarg...@comcast.net> wrote:
> I'm simply unsure of any of that any more. This is just
> IMO, but the main damage to IPOs came when Enron's
> name was smeared - a great many IPO were in Texas
> prior to that. When Enron became the horror it was,
> there was no longer any advantage to using Texas.
The big fall in IPOs was not Enron, but Sarbannes Oxley, which
mandated fraudulent accounting, followed by a further fall with the
Obama regime, when it became obvious that the only asset of value was
connections to the state.
> The VC community .... lost itself in its own navel-gazing.
> There at the end, it was very bizarre. VC would dictate
> costs well above what they'd put in to start with. They'd
> need a six or seven-figure CEO just for seed money.
That is SOX. If you do not have a six or seven figure CEO, you are
not in compliance with SOX, just as if you do not have a human
resources department, you are not in compliance with the race
relations act.
> > New jobs mostly come
> > from new companies. There are lots of new companies in
> > China, very few in America.
> They're not very good jobs. They don't even return enough
> to the general Chinese domestic economy to found any sort of
> consumerism - and I mean *any* sort.
A bunch of white Americans, disproportionately engineers, have gone to
China for the jobs, and they post photos that sure look like rampant
consumerism to me and blog reports that sound like rampant
consumerism. They go to shopping centers full cool stuff, and full of
Chinese. The store mannequins are nicer than western manikins, the
Christmas is more Christmassy. Looks to me like China is consumerism
central, with Walmart being an inferior echo of the real thing.
> There'll have to be an
> ironically Maoist "plan" to implement consumerism.
A Maoist plan to implement consumerism would not manifest as clothes
displayed by really high quality store mannequins.
> > The only way out of this hole for the American
> > government is to let people run businesses through
> > lawsuit proof tax havens.
> Not gonna happen. Say what you will of lawsuits,
> they work.
Work to enrich shysters. What else do you claim they accomplish?
Tell me a lawsuit against a business that accomplished a desirable
outcome?
John Galt
Let there be no doubt -- if Americans invented conspicuous consumerism,
the Chinese are perfecting it.
You haven't lived until you've seen a shopping mall 15 stories high.
JG
Les Cargill
> On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 16:18:35 -0500, Les Cargill
> <lcarg...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> I'm simply unsure of any of that any more. This is just
>> IMO, but the main damage to IPOs came when Enron's
>> name was smeared - a great many IPO were in Texas
>> prior to that. When Enron became the horror it was,
>> there was no longer any advantage to using Texas.
>
> The big fall in IPOs was not Enron, but Sarbannes Oxley, which
> mandated fraudulent accounting, followed by a further fall with the
> Obama regime, when it became obvious that the only asset of value was
> connections to the state.
>
>> The VC community .... lost itself in its own navel-gazing.
>> There at the end, it was very bizarre. VC would dictate
>> costs well above what they'd put in to start with. They'd
>> need a six or seven-figure CEO just for seed money.
>
> That is SOX. If you do not have a six or seven figure CEO, you are
> not in compliance with SOX, just as if you do not have a human
> resources department, you are not in compliance with the race
> relations act.
>
But firms were founded after SOX. No, I think there was
something else... At least in tech, Nortel alone ran
through a frightening amount of VC money in just a few
years, only to vanish all but altogether...
A "six or seven figure CEO" could easily be achieved by
deferred compensation - options.
>>> New jobs mostly come
>>> from new companies. There are lots of new companies in
>>> China, very few in America.
>
>> They're not very good jobs. They don't even return enough
>> to the general Chinese domestic economy to found any sort of
>> consumerism - and I mean *any* sort.
>
> A bunch of white Americans, disproportionately engineers, have gone to
> China for the jobs,
Rot. Is there something so special about an American
that they can be paid wages they'd accept?
> and they post photos that sure look like rampant
> consumerism to me and blog reports that sound like rampant
> consumerism.
Cameras lie. In terms of proportion of population, there's a
thin crust of consumerism in the port cities, and the usual
Potemkin Village stuff to go along with it.
May I remind you that Lincoln Steffens said, in 1921 "I have
seen the future, and it works."?
> They go to shopping centers full cool stuff, and full of
> Chinese. The store mannequins are nicer than western manikins, the
> Christmas is more Christmassy. Looks to me like China is consumerism
> central, with Walmart being an inferior echo of the real thing.
>
But the people who know these things predict a 100 year arc of
gradual improvement there. If one took photographs of the right
subjects in New York City in 1936, it would have been simple enough
to claim there was no Depression.
There's no incentive for transparent honesty in China. None.
>> There'll have to be an
>> ironically Maoist "plan" to implement consumerism.
>
> A Maoist plan to implement consumerism would not manifest as clothes
> displayed by really high quality store mannequins.
>
I cannot feign surprise at that. We're talking about a
Communist country here - think about that for a moment.
I'd be *keenly* interested in an estimate of the level of subsidy
for things in China.
>>> The only way out of this hole for the American
>>> government is to let people run businesses through
>>> lawsuit proof tax havens.
>
>> Not gonna happen. Say what you will of lawsuits,
>> they work.
>
> Work to enrich shysters. What else do you claim they accomplish?
>
I honestly don't know where to start. They're not exactly
critcal to the development of simple safety engineering, but
they provide *an* input to costing safety measures.
> Tell me a lawsuit against a business that accomplished a desirable
> outcome?
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/triangle/bostwicksumm.html
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
> James A. Donald wrote:
>
> Let there be no doubt -- if Americans invented conspicuous consumerism,
> the Chinese are perfecting it.
>
"Conspicuous"? The Chinese could develop a consumer class twice
the size of the total American population and still have a lot
of poverty. And they're at about ... 1900s level of overall
economic development, compared to the US. Lee Kuan Yew says
it'll probably take another hundred years...
And nothing touches China more than China touches it... ask
any Chinese immigrant where he wants his kids to live...
> You haven't lived until you've seen a shopping mall 15 stories high.
>
> JG
>
Uck. Good for them - they can have it.
--
Les Cargill
Rod Speed
> John Galt wrote
>> James A. Donald wrote
>> Let there be no doubt -- if Americans invented conspicuous
>> consumerism, the Chinese are perfecting it.
> "Conspicuous"?
Flashy, ostentatious etc.
> The Chinese could develop a consumer class twice the size of the total American population and still have a lot
> of poverty. And they're at about ... 1900s level of overall
> economic development, compared to the US.
Yes.
> Lee Kuan Yew says it'll probably take another hundred years...
And it remains to be seen if he's right or not. It happened a lot
quicker than that in Japan and there is no real evidence that
there is anything particularly different about the chinese on that.
> And nothing touches China more than China touches it... ask any Chinese immigrant where he wants his kids to live...
Thats one hell of a biased sample tho.
>> You haven't lived until you've seen a shopping mall 15 stories high.
> Uck. Good for them - they can have it.
John Galt
> John Galt wrote:
>> James A. Donald wrote:
> <snip>
>>
>> Let there be no doubt -- if Americans invented conspicuous
>> consumerism, the Chinese are perfecting it.
>>
>
> "Conspicuous"? The Chinese could develop a consumer class twice
> the size of the total American population and still have a lot
> of poverty. And they're at about ... 1900s level of overall
> economic development, compared to the US. Lee Kuan Yew says
> it'll probably take another hundred years...
Yep.
>
> And nothing touches China more than China touches it... ask
> any Chinese immigrant where he wants his kids to live...
>
>> You haven't lived until you've seen a shopping mall 15 stories high.
>>
>> JG
>>
>
> Uck. Good for them - they can have it.
And they do. I like them. The energy in them reminds me of the US of my
youth.
JG
>
> --
> Les Cargill
James A. Donald
> > Let there be no doubt -- if Americans invented
> > conspicuous consumerism, the Chinese are perfecting
> > it.
Les Cargill
> "Conspicuous"? The Chinese could develop a consumer
> class twice the size of the total American population
> and still have a lot of poverty. And they're at about
> ... 1900s level of overall economic development,
> compared to the US. Lee Kuan Yew says it'll probably
> take another hundred years...
To overtake the US in general standard of living, who
can say? That is far away, far enough away that
predictions are unwise.
To have a middle class comparable to that of the US in
numbers and standard of living - China is are well on
the way.
> And nothing touches China more than China touches
> it... ask any Chinese immigrant where he wants his
> kids to live...
This was true, is rapidly becoming less true. We are
seeing a lot of chinese heading back.
Many Chinese seem to like to make a living in China,
while holding a US passport as an escape hatch from
lawless actions by the communist party. I see a lot of
Chinese who theoretically spend X months a year in the
US and claim to be US residents, but whenever you want
to contact them, they are in China.
James A. Donald
> > Uck. Good for them - they can have it.
> And they do. I like them. The energy in them reminds me of the US of my
> youth.
As the two towers demonstrate, the US has become the can't do society.
This is the result of the dispersal of power between ever more
numerous Brahmins. To get anything done, you need an ever larger
number of approvals and permits, which you are probably not going to
get.
James A. Donald
> thin crust of consumerism in the port cities, and the usual
> Potemkin Village stuff to go along with it.
You may well argue that it is thin relative to the total Chinese
population, but in absolute terms, it is mighty thick.
> May I remind you that Lincoln Steffens said, in 1921 "I have
> seen the future, and it works."?
He was telling a politically motivated lie, like Galbraith who looked
around the kitchen of his luxury hotel and assured us he saw no signs
of famine. The people who report what is happening in China have no
political axe to grind. They are not political pilgrims, they are just
looking for a dollar, and dollars are where you find them.
> > They go to shopping centers full cool stuff, and full of
> > Chinese. The store mannequins are nicer than western mannequins, the
> > Christmas is more Christmassy. Looks to me like China is consumerism
> > central, with Walmart being an inferior echo of the real thing.
> But the people who know these things predict a 100 year arc of
> gradual improvement there.
We are not seeing gradual improvement, but dramatic change. You can
argue that internal contradictions will cause China to explode or
implode, but to claim "gradual" is denial and self deception. We are
seeing in China the rapid revolutionary change that communism promised
and conspicuously failed to deliver.
> > A Maoist plan to implement consumerism would not manifest as clothes
> > displayed by really high quality store mannequins.
> I cannot feign surprise at that. We're talking about a
> Communist country here - think about that for a moment.
Officially communist, but ...
"To get rich is glorious".
The secret of China is ultimately very simple. They just eased up on
the extent to which they were repressing capitalism. The capitalist
sector exists in space created by a mixture of official tolerance,
unofficial tolerance, sheer defiance of the law by private enterprise,
government corruption, systematic fraud by private businesses, and
systematic concealment, relying heavily on encrypted communications
passing through corporate servers located in tax havens. All this
makes China a roaring success which in the end the US will have to
imitate and learn from.
> > Tell me a lawsuit against a business that accomplished a desirable
> > outcome?
> http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/triangle/bostwicksumm.html
This summation tells us that the factory owners were responsible for
this tragedy. For this lawsuit to be desirable, it would have to be
that the owners *were* responsible for this tragedy. But the jury
voted to acquit.
Now the fire taught a lesson, and after the fire many things were done
differently - but it is not apparent whether they were done
differently because of government and courts, or because of the ASSE.
John Galt
> John Galt wrote:
>>> Let there be no doubt -- if Americans invented
>>> conspicuous consumerism, the Chinese are perfecting
>>> it.
>
> Les Cargill
>> "Conspicuous"? The Chinese could develop a consumer
>> class twice the size of the total American population
>> and still have a lot of poverty. And they're at about
>> ... 1900s level of overall economic development,
>> compared to the US. Lee Kuan Yew says it'll probably
>> take another hundred years...
>
> To overtake the US in general standard of living, who
> can say? That is far away, far enough away that
> predictions are unwise.
>
> To have a middle class comparable to that of the US in
> numbers and standard of living - China is are well on
> the way.
>
>> And nothing touches China more than China touches
>> it... ask any Chinese immigrant where he wants his
>> kids to live...
>
> This was true, is rapidly becoming less true. We are
> seeing a lot of chinese heading back.
Yep. I have a colleague, Chinese born, been here 18 years after school,
US citizen, all kids born in the US, very successful guy. They moved
back to China two years ago.
>
> Many Chinese seem to like to make a living in China,
> while holding a US passport as an escape hatch from
> lawless actions by the communist party. I see a lot of
> Chinese who theoretically spend X months a year in the
> US and claim to be US residents, but whenever you want
> to contact them, they are in China.
Yep.
JG
>
Les Cargill
And I think that explains more than you might realize. We got a lot
of mileage out of youth culture, but ... we're not so young now. Our
youth are now directed inward, and we're developing our calculus of the
Mandarin. But we still use the language of youth, and we no longer
believe in it:
http://store.theonion.com/product/che-wearing-che-tshirt-tshirt,115/
"Revolutiong" - Juan Carlos Rosenbloom, "Been Down So Long...".
"The energy of them" is an FDR thing with pretty much no visible
dissent amongst the ranks in government. Three Gorges is bigger than
Hoover Dam plus every Bureau of Reclamation project, plus the TVA, by
large factors.
To be sure - generations of pent up demand are in play.
> JG
>
>>
>> --
>> Les Cargill
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
>>>> You haven't lived until you've seen a shopping mall 15 stories high.
>
>>> Uck. Good for them - they can have it.
>
>> And they do. I like them. The energy in them reminds me of the US of my
>> youth.
>
> As the two towers demonstrate, the US has become the can't do society.
>
The towers were, frankly, a white elephant. They were a fiat of
David (or Nelson, depending) Rockefeller.
> This is the result of the dispersal of power between ever more
> numerous Brahmins. To get anything done, you need an ever larger
> number of approvals and permits, which you are probably not going to
> get.
>
Or it could be that development on that patch of land simply isn't
feasible.
--
Les Cargill
Rod Speed
>>>> You haven't lived until you've seen a shopping mall 15 stories high.
>>> Uck. Good for them - they can have it.
>> And they do. I like them. The energy in them reminds me of the US of my youth.
> As the two towers demonstrate, the US has become the can't do society.
Nope, there have always been terminal stupiditys like that, and always will be too.
> This is the result of the dispersal of power between ever more numerous Brahmins.
Nope.
> To get anything done, you need an ever larger number of
> approvals and permits, which you are probably not going to get.
Just another of your silly little fantasys on that last.
Les Cargill
> John Galt wrote:
>>> Let there be no doubt -- if Americans invented
>>> conspicuous consumerism, the Chinese are perfecting
>>> it.
>
> Les Cargill
>> "Conspicuous"? The Chinese could develop a consumer
>> class twice the size of the total American population
>> and still have a lot of poverty. And they're at about
>> ... 1900s level of overall economic development,
>> compared to the US. Lee Kuan Yew says it'll probably
>> take another hundred years...
>
> To overtake the US in general standard of living, who
> can say? That is far away, far enough away that
> predictions are unwise.
>
Indeed. And I doubt it'll remain the same after passing
through China.
> To have a middle class comparable to that of the US in
> numbers and standard of living - China is are well on
> the way.
>
In absolute numbers? So proportionately 330M/1330M
less?
>> And nothing touches China more than China touches
>> it... ask any Chinese immigrant where he wants his
>> kids to live...
>
> This was true, is rapidly becoming less true. We are
> seeing a lot of chinese heading back.
>
I'm impressed, then.
> Many Chinese seem to like to make a living in China,
> while holding a US passport as an escape hatch from
> lawless actions by the communist party.
Makes sense.
> I see a lot of
> Chinese who theoretically spend X months a year in the
> US and claim to be US residents, but whenever you want
> to contact them, they are in China.
>
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 13:56:29 -0500, Les Cargill
>> Cameras lie. In terms of proportion of population, there's a
>> thin crust of consumerism in the port cities, and the usual
>> Potemkin Village stuff to go along with it.
>
> You may well argue that it is thin relative to the total Chinese
> population, but in absolute terms, it is mighty thick.
>
Funny how fractions work. I take your point, though.
>> May I remind you that Lincoln Steffens said, in 1921 "I have
>> seen the future, and it works."?
>
> He was telling a politically motivated lie, like Galbraith who looked
> around the kitchen of his luxury hotel and assured us he saw no signs
> of famine. The people who report what is happening in China have no
> political axe to grind. They are not political pilgrims, they are just
> looking for a dollar, and dollars are where you find them.
>
They are selling something, whether they know it or not. No question
it's popping there, but ... this isn't anything *like* Hayekian
spontaneous order.
>>> They go to shopping centers full cool stuff, and full of
>>> Chinese. The store mannequins are nicer than western mannequins, the
>>> Christmas is more Christmassy. Looks to me like China is consumerism
>>> central, with Walmart being an inferior echo of the real thing.
>
>> But the people who know these things predict a 100 year arc of
>> gradual improvement there.
>
> We are not seeing gradual improvement, but dramatic change. You can
> argue that internal contradictions will cause China to explode or
> implode,
Nah. They're pretty good at general stability.
> but to claim "gradual" is denial and self deception.
There will be changes of various frequency. The present furor can't
go no forever - and it's not designed to. There's the initial
"landing" , then the "pacification", then the "occupation" phases.
We're close to the end of the first wave.
We are
> seeing in China the rapid revolutionary change that communism promised
> and conspicuously failed to deliver.
>
And in ten years? 20?
>>> A Maoist plan to implement consumerism would not manifest as clothes
>>> displayed by really high quality store mannequins.
>
>> I cannot feign surprise at that. We're talking about a
>> Communist country here - think about that for a moment.
>
> Officially communist, but ...
>
> "To get rich is glorious".
>
It's still five-year-plan-ism wearing a silk suit. Of course, so is GE.
> The secret of China is ultimately very simple. They just eased up on
> the extent to which they were repressing capitalism. The capitalist
> sector exists in space created by a mixture of official tolerance,
> unofficial tolerance, sheer defiance of the law by private enterprise,
LOL.
> government corruption, systematic fraud by private businesses, and
> systematic concealment, relying heavily on encrypted communications
> passing through corporate servers located in tax havens. All this
> makes China a roaring success which in the end the US will have to
> imitate and learn from.
>
Well, good. We're not bad at that sort of thing, either.
>>> Tell me a lawsuit against a business that accomplished a desirable
>>> outcome?
>
>> http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/triangle/bostwicksumm.html
>
> This summation tells us that the factory owners were responsible for
> this tragedy. For this lawsuit to be desirable, it would have to be
> that the owners *were* responsible for this tragedy. But the jury
> voted to acquit.
>
But it began the long process of actually considering the lives
and physical wellbeing of workers as something to be considered. In
that, it contributed to all our present wellbeing.
> Now the fire taught a lesson, and after the fire many things were done
> differently - but it is not apparent whether they were done
> differently because of government and courts, or because of the ASSE.
>
I would maintain that the courts had a place in it.
--
Les Cargill
Rod Speed
> Les Cargill wrote
>> Cameras lie. In terms of proportion of population,
>> there's a thin crust of consumerism in the port cities,
Its a lot more than just the port citys now.
>> and the usual Potemkin Village stuff to go along with it.
> You may well argue that it is thin relative to the total Chinese
> population, but in absolute terms, it is mighty thick.
It isnt the absolute terms that matters.
>> May I remind you that Lincoln Steffens said,
>> in 1921 "I have seen the future, and it works."?
> He was telling a politically motivated lie,
Nope, just a fool.
> like Galbraith who looked around the kitchen of his luxury hotel and assured us he saw no signs of famine.
Another fool, not a politically motivated lie.
> The people who report what is happening in China have no political axe to grind.
Corse plenty of them do.
> They are not political pilgrims,
Neither was Galbraith.
> they are just looking for a dollar, and dollars are where you find them.
And can be even more blinkered when that is all they are interested in.
>>> They go to shopping centers full cool stuff, and full of Chinese.
>>> The store mannequins are nicer than western mannequins,
>>> the Christmas is more Christmassy. Looks to me like China is
>>> consumerism central, with Walmart being an inferior echo of the
>>> real thing.
>> But the people who know these things predict a 100 year arc of gradual improvement there.
> We are not seeing gradual improvement, but dramatic change.
We are seeing both, particularly in rural areas.
> You can argue that internal contradictions will cause China to explode
> or implode, but to claim "gradual" is denial and self deception.
Nope, not with the bulk of the country it aint.
> We are seeing in China the rapid revolutionary change that
> communism promised and conspicuously failed to deliver.
Yes, but only in parts of the country.
It wasnt universal in Japan either.
>>> A Maoist plan to implement consumerism would not manifest
>>> as clothes displayed by really high quality store mannequins.
>> I cannot feign surprise at that. We're talking about a
>> Communist country here - think about that for a moment.
> Officially communist, but ...
> "To get rich is glorious".
And it remains to be seen how long thats the official line.
> The secret of China is ultimately very simple. They just eased
> up on the extent to which they were repressing capitalism.
Its MUCH more complicated than that, most obviously with infrastructure.
> The capitalist sector exists in space created by a mixture of
> official tolerance, unofficial tolerance, sheer defiance of the
> law by private enterprise, government corruption, systematic
> fraud by private businesses, and systematic concealment,
Yes.
> relying heavily on encrypted communications passing
> through corporate servers located in tax havens.
Nope, there is no need whatever for the corporate servers to be in tax havens.
> All this makes China a roaring success
Yes, but only in some areas like manufacturing.
> which in the end the US will have to imitate and learn from.
Like hell it ever will. The US did all that stuff itself at the same stage of its development.
>>> Tell me a lawsuit against a business that accomplished a desirable outcome?
>> http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/triangle/bostwicksumm.html
> This summation tells us that the factory owners were responsible for this tragedy.
That's just the prosecution's claim.
> For this lawsuit to be desirable, it would have to be
> that the owners *were* responsible for this tragedy.
Nope, what matters is whether the lawsuit produced real change in how things are done. It did.
> But the jury voted to acquit.
> Now the fire taught a lesson, and after the fire many things were done
> differently - but it is not apparent whether they were done differently
> because of government and courts, or because of the ASSE.
It wouldnt have produced the same outcome without the lawsuit.
James A. Donald
> > [failure to rebuild the towers] is the result of the
> > dispersal of power between ever more numerous
> > Brahmins. To get anything done, you need an ever
> > larger number of approvals and permits, which you
> > are probably not going to get.
Les Cargill
> Or it could be that development on that patch of land
> simply isn't feasible.
Certain it is not feasible, but that is because of
government, taxes, and regulation, not because no one
wants housing and office space in New York.
James A. Donald
> > to claim "gradual" is denial and self deception.
Les Cargill
> There will be changes of various frequency. The present furor can't
> go no forever
Why not? What is to stop the chinese? There is plenty of head room.
They are currently growing at about the same rate as Singapore, seven
to ten percent a year, Singapore is a long way ahead and shows no
signs of slowing down. If Singapore can do that, why not China?
> > We are
> > seeing in China the rapid revolutionary change that communism promised
> > and conspicuously failed to deliver.
> And in ten years? 20?
Singapore and Hong Kong point to where China will be in twenty five
years. In twenty five years Chinese GDP will be eight times larger
than it is now, and GDP per head will be what Singapore's is now, and
China will be growing as fast as Singapore is growing now.
Unless war or class war intrudes, as well they may, Chinese GDP per
head will be higher than the United States is now, just as Singaporean
GDP per head is higher than the United states is now.
The Chinese look at Hong Kong and Singapore and say "Hey, we want
that" Nothing can stop them except the propensity of the Chinese
government for war and class war - a not inconsiderable barrier, but
one that is far from inevitable.
> > Officially communist, but ...
> >
> > "To get rich is glorious".
> It's still five-year-plan-ism wearing a silk suit.
Those nice looking mannequins with the fashionable clothes are outside
the plan. In fact, all the nice stuff is outside the plan. Pizza is
outside the plan. The silk suit that dresses the five year plan comes
from outside the plan.
> > Now the fire taught a lesson, and after the fire many things were done
> > differently - but it is not apparent whether they were done
> > differently because of government and courts, or because of the ASSE.
> I would maintain that the courts had a place in it.
You can maintain that, but the jury acquitted.
Immortalist
ho...@yahoo.co> wrote:
> "Immortalist" <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:8e4c59ca-41cd-493c...@z10g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 24, 11:59 pm, "Giga" <"Giga" <just(removetheseandaddmatthe end)
>
>
>
> ho...@yahoo.co> wrote:
> > "Immortalist" <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> > For 200 years, we’ve lived in a Western-shaped world. That era is
> > progressively going to come to an end, as China becomes more and more
> > influential.
>
> > =Except China is already very influenced by some western ideas, but sure
> > will bring a philosophical breath of very fresh air hopefully.
>
> > This is already happening in certain parts of the world,
> > much more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
> > shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
>
> > For example, the rise of Mandarin in the region; It’s already a
> > compulsory language in several countries-Thailand,
>
> > =What! Got a reference for that?
>
> As Guan put it in his speech, a "wave of Mandarin learning" is
> burgeoning in Thailand, with 1,105 schools and colleges across the
> kingdom having introduced Mandarin courses and a total of 400,000 Thai
> people studying the language in diversified ways.
>
> http://www.chinesetime.cn/learn/chinese/forum/tabid/119/forumid/23/po...
>
> Mandarin at Ascot: The growing importance of China in this region has
> made this language choice very popular.
>
> http://www.ascot.ac.th/3_foreign_languages_mandarin.php
>
> =That is a way from compulsory still. However 1000 'volunteers', means paid
> for by the Chinese state probably. It is a great thing if the majority of
> Thais get any language education, or much modern education at all. English
> is notoriously poor in that country, especially compared to the others
> around it and considerring the importance of tourism. Maybe Thais are more
> culturally sympathetic to Chinese, not sure. I gwt thw impression that many
> have little respect or liking for Westerners or Western culture.
>
> Chinese Singaporeans urged to speak Mandarin as common language;
> Singapore's Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said that Mandarin has to be
> the common language of Chinese Singaporeans, regardless of their
> dialect groups. Lee said that the trend is clear, in two generations,
> Mandarin will become our mother tongue.
>
> http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-03/18/content_11028547.htm
>
> =I know a few Singaporean Chinese, they speak a variety of Chinese dialects,
> totally different than Manadarin. Often they speak good Manadarin or
> Cantonese as well. Nearly all below 60 speak practically perfect English.
> Even more so they are culturally very very Westernised. They even call
> themselves 'bananas': yellow on the outside, white on the inside. And I have
> to say that is very much my own impression. Whether Mandarin will be their
> primary language in 50 years I'm not sure. Perhaps both English and
> Mandarin, the great thing about language is the more you learn the easier
> they are to pick up, generally. They are not competing. Culturally I think
> it will be a different story.
Well, you guys have got me on this "compulsory language" business, for
the moment. The author in the interview climed it and I suppose if I
actually had the book, which I would like to read, I might find some
note about this use of language. Maybe in the future I can bash the
West again and bring this up when I have a better source for backup,
sorry.
http://www.amazon.com/When-China-Rules-World-Western/dp/1594201854
It is about the ability to speak Mandarin in a Chinese society.
The teaching of Mandarin must be made compulsory for all Singaporeans,
irrespective of their race.
The academic curriculum should be revised to ensure that Singapore’s
kids are functionally fluent in three languages: English, Mandarin,
and their mother tongue (Malay or Tamil).
Some may suggest that such an action can be deemed to be domineering
by the majority race. Or whether Singapore’s already overburdened
students can manage another serious subject.
Learning Mandarin is a practical matter and one that should be
motivated by self-interest. If I could speak Mandarin my employability
and market value will increase tremendously. The nature of jobs and
occupations available to me multiply exponentially. These jobs may
range from manufacturing concerns that have production facilities in
China to entities trying to break into the Chinese market for goods
and services.
Can a non-Mandarin speaker in Singapore truly integrate into
Singaporean society? Despite the role of English as Singapore’s
universal language an English speaker (like me) will always face
limitations. The idea is not to supplant the supremacy of English but
to take integration of all races in Singapore to the next level.
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/08/make-mandarin-compulsory-for-all/
Mandarin Chinese is booming in British schools. New figures show a 27
per cent rise this year in pupils sitting the version of the GCSE most
suitable for newcomers to the language. And there has been an even
more noticeable increase in Mandarin pupils for the first stage of the
new Asset Languages qualifications system, where entries have gone up
900 per cent.
ya ya, still does show what we are after here...
James A. Donald
> > Galbraith who looked around the kitchen of his luxury hotel and assured us he saw no signs of famine.
"Rod Speed"
> Another fool, not a politically motivated lie.
Galbraith not political?
> > political pilgrims,
> Neither was Galbraith.
Galbraith was on a mission seeking salvation - much like the other
political pilgrims who saw slavery and terror and loved it.
> > You can argue that internal contradictions will cause China to explode
> > or implode, but to claim "gradual" is denial and self deception.
> Nope, not with the bulk of the country it aint.
We are seeing truly revolutionary change in rural china - a gigantic
rise in the standard of living of the peasantry and their personal
liberty.
> > We are seeing in China the rapid revolutionary change that
> > communism promised and conspicuously failed to deliver.
> Yes, but only in parts of the country.
If it was only in parts of the country, then a flow of peasants from
the remaining poor parts would keep wages down. This not happening,
wages are rising everywhere in China, and real living standards have
risen a very long way.
> > "To get rich is glorious".
> And it remains to be seen how long thats the official line.
Yes, China could self destruct at any moment - but right now, it is
the US that is self destructing, and China is not.
Rod Speed
> Les Cargill
>>> to claim "gradual" is denial and self deception.
>> There will be changes of various frequency.
>> The present furor can't go no forever
> Why not? What is to stop the chinese?
Markets for what they produce.
> There is plenty of head room. They are currently growing at
> about the same rate as Singapore, seven to ten percent a year,
Singapore isnt growing at anything like that rate.
> Singapore is a long way ahead and shows no signs of slowing down.
It just has.
> If Singapore can do that, why not China?
It cant, and there is the tiny problem of the relative size of the two places.
>>> We are seeing in China the rapid revolutionary change that
>>> communism promised and conspicuously failed to deliver.
>> And in ten years? 20?
> Singapore and Hong Kong point to where China will be in twenty five years.
No they dont, essentially because they are so much smaller.
> In twenty five years Chinese GDP will be eight times larger than it is now,
That number is straight from your arse, we can tell from the smell.
> and GDP per head will be what Singapore's is now,
Nope, essentially because of the immense numbers
of the rural poor in china that singapore doesnt have.
> and China will be growing as fast as Singapore is growing now.
Its ALREADY growing much faster.
> Unless war or class war intrudes, as well they may,
Not a chance with either.
> Chinese GDP per head will be higher than the United States is now,
Not a chance, essentially because of the immense numbers of the rural poor
and the state of their agriculture which wont be industrialising any time soon.
> just as Singaporean GDP per head is higher than the United states is now.
Completely different situation, its a tiny little place.
> The Chinese look at Hong Kong and Singapore and say "Hey, we want that"
Doesnt mean they are all going to get that.
> Nothing can stop them
Wrong, the immense number of rural poor will, you watch.
> except the propensity of the Chinese government for war
It aint been that stupid in a long time now.
> and class war - a not inconsiderable barrier, but one that is far from inevitable.
>>> Officially communist, but ...
>>> "To get rich is glorious".
>> It's still five-year-plan-ism wearing a silk suit.
> Those nice looking mannequins with the fashionable clothes
> are outside the plan. In fact, all the nice stuff is outside the plan.
> Pizza is outside the plan.
All that shit is froth and bubble that doesnt matter a damn.
> The silk suit that dresses the five year plan comes from outside the plan.
>>> Now the fire taught a lesson, and after the fire many things were
>>> done differently - but it is not apparent whether they were done
>>> differently because of government and courts, or because of the ASSE.
>> I would maintain that the courts had a place in it.
> You can maintain that, but the jury acquitted.
Irrelevant to what the trial achieved.
Giga
"Immortalist" <reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f9ee7dd6-756c-4066...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
http://www.amazon.com/When-China-Rules-World-Western/dp/1594201854
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/08/make-mandarin-compulsory-for-all/
=Nehaw, sie sie, that's it for me atm.
Giga
"Les Cargill" <lcarg...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hep6de$dbn$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
From another point of view the fact that the civilisation is so old but is
having to play catch-up with the West might be seen as a negative. Thre are
still a few descendents of Mayan and Inca's around, maybe a 10,000 year old
cultural tradition, I wonder if they consider themselves culturally superior
to the West, or indeed China. And India arguably has an even more ancient
culture. Pure age of a culture is not a measure of its superiority. ..Some
Chinese are very proud of inventing gunpowder and printing presss before the
West, etc. But look what the West did with them and what China didn't. I
suspect the Chinese Emporeres kept most of this technology under their
control, where as the West ad the more liberal free for all which led to
such rapid scientific and economic development. On the ther hand I am a
great admirer of East Asian culture and I'm sure we in the EWest have much
to learn from it.
Rod Speed
> Giga ho...@yahoo.co> wrote
>> Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Giga ho...@yahoo.co> wrote
>>> Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>> For 200 years, we�ve lived in a Western-shaped world.
>>>> That era is progressively going to come to an end, as
>>>> China becomes more and more influential.
>>> Except China is already very influenced by some western ideas,
>>> but sure will bring a philosophical breath of very fresh air hopefully.
>>>> This is already happening in certain parts of the world,
>>>> much more than in the West; East Asia is already being increasingly
>>>> shaped by Chinese influence of many different kinds.
>>>> For example, the rise of Mandarin in the region; It�s already
>>>> a compulsory language in several countries-Thailand,
>>> What! Got a reference for that?
>> http://www.chinesetime.cn/learn/chinese/forum/tabid/119/forumid/23/po...
>> http://www.ascot.ac.th/3_foreign_languages_mandarin.php
>> http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-03/18/content_11028547.htm
We have indeed.
> for the moment.
Forever, actually.
> The author in the interview climed it
Just because some fool claims something, doesnt make it gospel.
> and I suppose if I actually had the book, which I would like
> to read, I might find some note about this use of language.
And you might not too.
> Maybe in the future I can bash the West again and bring
> this up when I have a better source for backup, sorry.
A Jap would at least have the decency to disembowel itself.
Dont make a mess of the carpet...
> http://www.amazon.com/When-China-Rules-World-Western/dp/1594201854
Just another completely mindless steaming turd...
> It is about the ability to speak Mandarin in a Chinese society.
> The teaching of Mandarin must be made compulsory
> for all Singaporeans, irrespective of their race.
Seig Heil...
> The academic curriculum should be revised to ensure that
> Singapore�s kids are functionally fluent in three languages:
> English, Mandarin, and their mother tongue (Malay or Tamil).
Go and fuck yourself, again.
> Some may suggest that such an action can be
> deemed to be domineering by the majority race.
And that is precisely what it would be when no one else needs Mandarin.
> Or whether Singapore�s already overburdened
> students can manage another serious subject.
And whether it makes any sense to do that even if they can.
> Learning Mandarin is a practical matter and
> one that should be motivated by self-interest.
But you want to make it compulsory anyway.
> If I could speak Mandarin my employability
> and market value will increase tremendously.
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
> The nature of jobs and occupations available to me multiply exponentially.
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
> These jobs may range from manufacturing concerns
> that have production facilities in China to entities trying
> to break into the Chinese market for goods and services.
Those fuckers and get off their lard arses and learn english.
> Can a non-Mandarin speaker in Singapore
> truly integrate into Singaporean society?
Who would want to ?
> Despite the role of English as Singapore�s universal language
Funny that.
> an English speaker (like me) will always face limitations.
You're always free to top yourself...
> The idea is not to supplant the supremacy of English but to
> take integration of all races in Singapore to the next level.
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
> http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/08/make-mandarin-compulsory-for-all/
Just another completely mindless steaming turd...
> Mandarin Chinese is booming in British schools.
More fool the stupid english.
> New figures show a 27 per cent rise this year in pupils sitting the
> version of the GCSE most suitable for newcomers to the language.
More fool those fools.
> And there has been an even more noticeable increase in Mandarin
> pupils for the first stage of the new Asset Languages qualifications
> system, where entries have gone up 900 per cent.
More fool those fools in spades.
Just another completely mindless steaming turd...
> ya ya, still does show what we are after here...
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>> James A. Donald wrote
>>> Galbraith who looked around the kitchen of his luxury
>>> hotel and assured us he saw no signs of famine.
>> Another fool, not a politically motivated lie.
> Galbraith not political?
THATS NOT A POLITICALLY MOTIVATED LIE, fuckwit.
>>> The people who report what is happening in China have no political axe to grind.
>> Corse plenty of them do.
>>> They are not political pilgrims,
>> Neither was Galbraith.
> Galbraith was on a mission seeking salvation
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
> - much like the other political pilgrims
He wasnt a pilgrim of any sort, fuckwit.
> who saw slavery and terror and loved it.
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
>>> You can argue that internal contradictions will cause China to explode
>>> or implode, but to claim "gradual" is denial and self deception.
>> Nope, not with the bulk of the country it aint.
> We are seeing truly revolutionary change in rural china
Nope.
> - a gigantic rise in the standard of living of the peasantry
Nope.
> and their personal liberty.
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
>>> We are seeing in China the rapid revolutionary change that
>>> communism promised and conspicuously failed to deliver.
>> Yes, but only in parts of the country.
> If it was only in parts of the country, then a flow of peasants
> from the remaining poor parts would keep wages down.
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
> This not happening, wages are rising everywhere in China,
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
> and real living standards have risen a very long way.
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
>>> "To get rich is glorious".
>> And it remains to be seen how long thats the official line.
> Yes, China could self destruct at any moment
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
> - but right now, it is the US that is self destructing,
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
> and China is not.
You did manage to get that bit right, presumably by accident.
James A. Donald
"Rod Speed"
> Markets for what they produce.
Consumption is easy, production is hard. Says law: Supply creates
demand.
If the US should sink beneath the waves, it will only be a minor and
temperory inconvenience for the chinese.
> > There is plenty of head room. They are currently growing at
> > about the same rate as Singapore, seven to ten percent a year,
> > Singapore is a long way ahead and shows no signs of slowing down.
> It just has.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ilA0VxnxIi0xok6aQ8pIuk4gI1dw
: : Powered by electronics and biomedical exports, the economy soared 20.4 percent in the three months to June compared with the first quarter on a seasonally adjusted annualised basis, the Ministry of Trade and Industry said.
> > If Singapore can do that, why not China?
> It cant, and there is the tiny problem of the relative size of the two places.
China has land and resources, Singapore does not. This makes growth
easier, not harder.
> > Singapore and Hong Kong point to where China will be in twenty five years.
> No they dont, essentially because they are so much smaller.
What they did without land, resources, or even water, can be done a
lot better if you have land, resources, and water.
> Nope, essentially because of the immense numbers
> of the rural poor in china that singapore doesnt have.
Singaporeans *were* the rural poor.
> > Nothing can stop them
> Wrong, the immense number of rural poor will, you watch.
As we speak, the rural poor are rapidly ceasing to be poor.
John Galt
The above demographic point certainly plays into it. However, there is
also a very appealing "lack of cynicism" on the part of these young
Chinese which also does. Suffice to say that they don't view working at
McDonalds (just to provide the extreme example) as a dead end job --
they approach it with the same enthusiasm that a white-collar
professional approaches his or her first job after they earn their
college degree.
JG
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>> James A. Donald wrote
>>> What is to stop the chinese?
>> Markets for what they produce.
> Consumption is easy,
Not for china it isnt. They have a massive problem with
the purchasing power of the bulk of their population.
> production is hard.
Like hell it is for china.
> Says law: Supply creates demand.
Usual utterly mindless glib crap. It doesnt in china.
> If the US should sink beneath the waves, it will only be
> a minor and temperory inconvenience for the chinese.
Thats very arguable depending on how it sank. Even
you should have noticed that the US has just completely
imploded the entire world financial system, AGAIN.
There would be more than a minor glitch in the oil
industry if the US and all USians disappeared overnight.
In spades militarily.
>>> There is plenty of head room. They are currently growing at
>>> about the same rate as Singapore, seven to ten percent a year,
>>> Singapore is a long way ahead and shows no signs of slowing down.
>> It just has.
> http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ilA0VxnxIi0xok6aQ8pIuk4gI1dw
Doesnt say that it hasnt.
>>> Powered by electronics and biomedical exports, the economy
>>> soared 20.4 percent in the three months to June compared
>>> with the first quarter on a seasonally adjusted annualised
>>> basis, the Ministry of Trade and Industry said.
Pity about the big sag they saw as a result of the GFC.
And they look like they will get a reduction in GDP of about 5%, nothing like china.
And thats not sustainable anyway, you watch.
>>> If Singapore can do that, why not China?
>> It cant, and there is the tiny problem of the relative size of the two places.
> China has land and resources, Singapore does not.
> This makes growth easier, not harder.
Pity about the difference in population.
>>> Singapore and Hong Kong point to where China will be in twenty five years.
>> No they dont, essentially because they are so much smaller.
> What they did without land, resources, or even water, can
> be done a lot better if you have land, resources, and water.
Its MUCH more complicated than that. Even you should be able to
grasp that while HongKong had no trouble selling what it produced,
if china produced the same amount per head of population, there
might just be a tiny problem with enough buyers for all that stuff.
>> Nope, essentially because of the immense numbers
>> of the rural poor in china that singapore doesnt have.
> Singaporeans *were* the rural poor.
They never had that many rural poor as a percentage of the population.
>>> Nothing can stop them
>> Wrong, the immense number of rural poor will, you watch.
> As we speak, the rural poor are rapidly ceasing to be poor.
SOME of them are less poor than they used to be. The whole of china
wont be anything like Singapore or HongKong any time soon, you watch.
Rod Speed
No they dont. What remnants do remain are VERY insignificant.
> And India arguably has an even more ancient culture. Pure age of a culture is not a measure of its superiority.
Indeed.
> Some Chinese are very proud of inventing gunpowder and printing presss before the West, etc. But look what the West
> did with them and what China didn't.
And look at what the west did with medicine and rigorous science in spades.
The chinese did some very decent engineering, but never did
manage much in the way of rigorous engineering and medicine.
They didnt even manage to work out the basics of infection etc
or even manage to work out the basics of clean drinking water etc.
> I suspect the Chinese Emporeres kept most of this technology under their control,
Not even possible with quite a bit of it.
> where as the West ad the more liberal free for all which led to such rapid scientific and economic development.
Its more likely that the rapid scientific and medical development was more a mindset.
> On the ther hand I am a great admirer of East Asian culture
I'm not. In spades with the chinese. While singapore is quite successful
economically, if you dont agree with the dictator's ideas, you're fucked.
> and I'm sure we in the EWest have much to learn from it.
Nope, not a thing. We didnt with the Japs either.
Les Cargill
I am sure that is very true.
> Suffice to say that they don't view working at
> McDonalds (just to provide the extreme example) as a dead end job --
> they approach it with the same enthusiasm that a white-collar
> professional approaches his or her first job after they earn their
> college degree.
>
For what it is worth, my youngest is a barista at a Starbucks,
and she just has a ball. She's a science student, and the
opportunity to interact with people is a welcome counterpoint.
Plus she gets her charm from her Dad.
So cynicism is chosen, and isn't destiny. From what I have seen,
it's anything but a lousy job. They're offering her shift management
for being one of the better ones.
I don't know why McDonalds should be any different, unless they're
significantly more overbearing with "flair" ala "Office Space". And
after a while, that would be something you got used to, as you began to
know other crew members and felt more team spirit and connection to the
others.
And this being said, our cynicism is something I rather
treasure. Please recall that there's nothing like freedom
of thought in China. If you hold up a placard in front
of a government building there, they take you away.
"Sino happy people holding Han (dynasty artworks)...."
> JG
>
>>
>>> JG
>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Les Cargill
>>
>> --
>> Les Cargill
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
> James A. Donald wrote:
>>> to claim "gradual" is denial and self deception.
>
> Les Cargill
>> There will be changes of various frequency. The present furor can't
>> go no forever
>
> Why not? What is to stop the chinese? There is plenty of head room.
> They are currently growing at about the same rate as Singapore, seven
> to ten percent a year, Singapore is a long way ahead and shows no
> signs of slowing down. If Singapore can do that, why not China?
>
You get into Singapore by defending your qualifications, roughly.
One is Chinese when they're born that. Singapore is also a
financial center, which has a much higher long term growth potential
than brute manufacturing.
But I can't really argue, other than to note "who will buy it all"?
>>> We are
>>> seeing in China the rapid revolutionary change that communism promised
>>> and conspicuously failed to deliver.
>
>> And in ten years? 20?
>
> Singapore and Hong Kong point to where China will be in twenty five
> years.
Singapore and Hong Kong are transaction-places, abstract and
not constrained by the laws of industrial mechanics and psychology. I'm
sure at one point Michigan grew faster than New York, but that's not
the case now.
> In twenty five years Chinese GDP will be eight times larger
> than it is now, and GDP per head will be what Singapore's is now, and
> China will be growing as fast as Singapore is growing now.
>
"GDP per head" maybe, but ... there will be lumps in
the porridge for sure. Actually, maybe not - production is
relatively scientific compared to when we learned it.
> Unless war or class war intrudes, as well they may, Chinese GDP per
> head will be higher than the United States is now, just as Singaporean
> GDP per head is higher than the United states is now.
>
This idea makes me immensely happy. I sincerely hope it's true.
People my age grew up with ( I didn't, but I know others did )
"Children in China are starving, eat your broccoli."
It just seems such a massive victory for the human species.
> The Chinese look at Hong Kong and Singapore and say "Hey, we want
> that" Nothing can stop them except the propensity of the Chinese
> government for war and class war - a not inconsiderable barrier, but
> one that is far from inevitable.
>
What will change is how generations shift emphasis. May I remind
the assembled that there's nothing like .. a republic over
there. If we grumpy Americans are a veal fed too much milk-in-credit,
there is no Chinese Mark Twain to teach the doctrine of dissatisfaction
to the Chinese whatsoever.
>>> Officially communist, but ...
>>>
>>> "To get rich is glorious".
>
>> It's still five-year-plan-ism wearing a silk suit.
>
> Those nice looking mannequins with the fashionable clothes are outside
> the plan.
No. They really aren't.
> In fact, all the nice stuff is outside the plan. Pizza is
> outside the plan. The silk suit that dresses the five year plan comes
> from outside the plan.
>
Indeed. But there is still a plan, and herds develop fear at
some point. They bask in the genius of Deng Xiao Peng, and have all
tides rising, but things come along...
But yes, the essential dualism of Bhuddism, the thesis-antithesis-
synthesis of it all seems to serve them well.
>>> Now the fire taught a lesson, and after the fire many things were done
>>> differently - but it is not apparent whether they were done
>>> differently because of government and courts, or because of the ASSE.
>
>> I would maintain that the courts had a place in it.
>
> You can maintain that, but the jury acquitted.
>
That's correct, and it was pre-civil handling of this sort of thing.
Absent the requirement of proof of malfeasance, of simply showing
negligence as in a civil matter, the outcome would have been different.
I'd read it as that simply having a trial was enough to plant seeds, and
that later examples bootstrapped a different version of our conception
of the value of a human life.
--
Les Cargill
John Galt
Good for her. My kid (high school dropout, not because of lack of
brains, immediate GED afterward) ended up as a grunt at Lowes in the
outdoor department, and was in their management training program within
a year, earning 40K a year. He moved over to Gander Mt., more in line
with his interests, and is now an asst managemer making 70K, with a
chance to have his own store in the next five years (200K).
He's 25. Same idea. Good kid, willing to make the most out of any oppt
they have. So, what we have is not a hard-and-fast rule, but a general
attitude about low-wage employment.
Perhaps this will change in the next few years; when you have 10%
unemployment, you get excited about any job you can get, I figure.
>
> I don't know why McDonalds should be any different, unless they're
> significantly more overbearing with "flair" ala "Office Space". And
> after a while, that would be something you got used to, as you began to
> know other crew members and felt more team spirit and connection to the
> others.
>
> And this being said, our cynicism is something I rather
> treasure. Please recall that there's nothing like freedom
> of thought in China. If you hold up a placard in front
> of a government building there, they take you away.
Well, there's that, of course. But, not everyone is political, eh? Not
here, not there.
JG
Les Cargill
But she got endless stories about family in much worse positions,
as much as I could calculate she'd bear. So I'd gather I'd substituted
somewhat in narrative for what the average Chinese who has grandparents
who lived through the Cultural Revolution lived through.
But I'd like to think there's more to growth than "forty miles
uphill in the snow" narrative.
> Perhaps this will change in the next few years; when you have 10%
> unemployment, you get excited about any job you can get, I figure.
>>
>> I don't know why McDonalds should be any different, unless they're
>> significantly more overbearing with "flair" ala "Office Space". And
>> after a while, that would be something you got used to, as you began
>> to know other crew members and felt more team spirit and connection to
>> the
>> others.
>>
>> And this being said, our cynicism is something I rather
>> treasure. Please recall that there's nothing like freedom
>> of thought in China. If you hold up a placard in front
>> of a government building there, they take you away.
>
> Well, there's that, of course. But, not everyone is political, eh? Not
> here, not there.
>
Well, I don't expect anybody there is, that hasn't passed a certain
level of gate-test to be so.
An entire nation of "how 'bout them Cowboys?"
<snip>
--
Les Cargill
John Galt
Or: Here, only Hollywood actors and rock stars can get people to stand
outside in the rain to see them.
There, they stand outside in the rain to see Bill Gates, Warren Buffet,
and any of the world Fortune 50 CEO's.
True story: In 2006, they closed and cleaned the road (a task that takes
a couple of days at least) between the Bangalore airport and downtown
for only two people -- One was Sonia Gandhi; the other was IBM's Sam
Palmisano.
JG
>
> <snip>
>
> --
> Les Cargill
*Anarcissie*
That sounds fairly creepy. Hollywood actors and rock
stars at least deliver some entertainment for the
adulation.
Some of the aforesaid anecdotes made me wonder
"Why, if everyone is so happy, are they so miserable?"
But then the reports of the happy Chinese gave me the
idea that misery (the era of the Chinese civil wars and
the Cultural Revolution) led to happiness (of the
Chinese happily flipping burgers or whatever they do
in their low-wage jobs). People will produce as much
misery as they need, and then they'll be happy.
Les Cargill
There is, of course, a story there...our business leaders
decided celebs were better spokespeople than themselves.
> There, they stand outside in the rain to see Bill Gates, Warren Buffet,
> and any of the world Fortune 50 CEO's.
>
> True story: In 2006, they closed and cleaned the road (a task that takes
> a couple of days at least) between the Bangalore airport and downtown
> for only two people -- One was Sonia Gandhi; the other was IBM's Sam
> Palmisano.
>
Wow. They used to do things like that in New York at the turn of
the 20th century. 'Course, Sam Clemens drew crowds, too.
This being said, I am not sure fame enhanced anybody's
business acumen.
> JG
>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> --
>> Les Cargill
--
Les Cargill
James A. Donald
> True story: In 2006, they closed and cleaned the road
> (a task that takes a couple of days at least) between
> the Bangalore airport and downtown for only two people
> -- One was Sonia Gandhi; the other was IBM's Sam
> Palmisano.
From time to time Chinese authorities, and less
frequently Indian authorities, demonstrate that they
accept the Ayn Rand narrative that the west rejects -
that entrepreneurs create wealth, that the quality of
entrepreneurship is the difference between a rich country
and third world hell hole.
Immortalist
>
> Just another completely mindless steaming turd...
>
> > ya ya, still does show what we are after here...
>
> Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
A lot of your words seem like a waste of time. But if you want a
peeing contest I suppose there are others who delight in ignorance
like you. Maybe your breathing a sigh of relief because you would not
have to try and distract people from having to "concede" the issue to
me. Actually by your exaggerated response to my honesty about being at
a certain point of gathering evidence, I wonder;
Has there ever been a time or a position that Rod Speed was wrong on;
how did he handle those times? Can you point to one place where you
were more or less proved wrong and you agreed you were wrong and
learned something from your mistakes?
Your not even that good at the fallacy of ridicule. The better
bullies, me, Rudy, Dutch, Rooster, and possibly Mike Gordge, Tim, you
don't really compare.
John Galt
Never does or did. I think what Jack Welsh did worked for him, but he's
inadvertently created a generation of GE/Welsh wannabees who interpret
his methods as brutally coercive treatment of employees.
Regarding Palmisano, IBM is as much responsible for Bangalore's
prosperity as any other actor, and that is the reason for his reception.
1/8 of all IBMers work in India, at this juncture.
JG
Rod Speed
>> We have indeed.
>>> for the moment.
>> Forever, actually.
>>> http://www.amazon.com/When-China-Rules-World-Western/dp/1594201854
>> Seig Heil...
>> Funny that.
>>> http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/08/make-mandarin-compulsory-for-all/
>> More fool those fools.
>>> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/language-o...
You never ever could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.
> But if you want a peeing contest
Just another of your pathetic little childish fantasys.
> I suppose there are others who delight in ignorance like you.
You never ever could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.
> Maybe your breathing a sigh of relief because you would not have
> to try and distract people from having to "concede" the issue to me.
You never ever could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.
> Actually by your exaggerated response to my honesty about
> being at a certain point of gathering evidence, I wonder;
> Has there ever been a time or a position that Rod Speed was wrong on;
Yes, and even someone as stupid as you can find them
using groups.google, because I often call them brain farts.
> how did he handle those times? Can you point to one place
> where you were more or less proved wrong and you agreed
> you were wrong and learned something from your mistakes?
Rven someone as stupid as you can find them using
groups.google, because I often call them brain farts.
<reams of your puerile attempts at insults any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where they belong>
Immortalist
Your not very good at debating. Maybe your good at yelling down at the
bar?