3 hours ago, Traubert said:

Up to you. You chose to cast aspersions on my postings. Very American. Offer a challenge and the jaw comes out. Aggression beats debate. At no point did I say don't comment. I said don't bother reading or ignore. Not directions, suggestions.

 

Can you point to a party slogan I've 'parroted?' I've never read the constitution or studied Marxism. I'm a business major.

 

The ghost cities story was because you said that bringing people out of poverty means they want more. I agree, no point in feeding them once and throwing them back. The story shows how, once they are relieved from poverty, they are given accommodation and a means to pay for it with their labour. It also demonstrates how China is developing it's domestic market to move away from an export economy, another topic you commented on.

 

I really wasn't trying to be obscure. I would have thought if you remembered your own post, you would see that I was answering in a factual, demonstrable manner. It seems you were already pugnacious by that time.

 

China has been better to me than the UK was in the 50 years that I lived there. That's the point of view I speak from.

 

Drivel.

 

I'm not American, and your wide-brush "take" on Americans is nonsense. You do not offer any challenge, nor do you debate. You post Chinese government talking points in English, that's all. As for your so-called "suggestions", doubt anyone's interested much.

 

The ghost cities deflection is irrelevant to the point made. People's standard of living goes up, they start to expect more. You seem to think China is able to match that demand regardless of international trade issues. Good luck with that fairy tale.

 

Your personal situation can neither be verified, nor is it necessarily indicative of general issues. 

cant be bothered answering now

Good on China. 

 

A real man, in a world of wimps. 

Some off topic posts and replies have been removed. 

15 hours ago, Nowisee said:

There's very little to believe about china.

One thing you can believe. China has never shown the least bit of reluctance to sacrifice as many of it's citizens as necessary in order for it to accomplish it's goals. Often unsucessfully.

On 7/25/2019 at 11:22 AM, DrTuner said:

There would likely be sanctions, UN security council would yap, Taiwan would be obliterated. China would be contained and isolated though and commies are prone to implode when that happens. Silver lining.

People who were born with saw dust in their mouth could endure much hardship.  

 

17 hours ago, Traubert said:

It's a Chinese city, in China, populated by Chinese people. Always was, always will be. That Britain bullied their way in there at gunpoint didn't change that, plus they treated the Chinese like trash while they were there.

 

Tell me exactly how they are not adhering to the Sino/British Declaration. Please don't use woolly press terms like 'erosion of rights.' What rights are being eroded?

It is an autonomous region,  books that are banned in China can legally be sold in Hk.   

Youtube and the New York Times website can be accessed.  There was never a one child per family law.    

Last month, a million HK people demonstrate in the street because they misunderstand the "Sino/British Declaration"   

1 hour ago, Johnnyngai said:

People who were born with saw dust in their mouth could endure much hardship.  

 

 

People who were given a taste of something better wouldn't be keen on going back to chewing sawdust.

22 hours ago, seajae said:

really rich coming from china who has been claiming everything it can,

They even claim that they have rights to the Arctic, even though they're nowhere near the Arctic seas.

20 hours ago, Morch said:

 

People who were given a taste of something better wouldn't be keen on going back to chewing sawdust.

Ten years ago, I saw an article on the New York Times about Vietnamese and Chinese suffer the highest degree of tax pain.   

High tax is one way to keep the population tough and ready to fight. 

5 hours ago, Johnnyngai said:

Ten years ago, I saw an article on the New York Times about Vietnamese and Chinese suffer the highest degree of tax pain.   

High tax is one way to keep the population tough and ready to fight. 

 

I wouldn't know how high tax rate is "one way to keep the population tough and ready to fight". Far as I recall, pretty high taxes in various Scandinavian countries, and they haven't been much into war for many years now.

 

As for the preamble to this bogus-sounding assertion, kinda hard to comment on a supposed 10-years old article, which may or may not have contained such information.

16 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I wouldn't know how high tax rate is "one way to keep the population tough and ready to fight". Far as I recall, pretty high taxes in various Scandinavian countries, and they haven't been much into war for many years now.

 

As for the preamble to this bogus-sounding assertion, kinda hard to comment on a supposed 10-years old article, which may or may not have contained such information.

High tax with little in terms of social benefit / social safety net, was what the NYT mean.  

 

China had said to effect some years ago that unification by 2020 was the must target date. So as they are ramping up military exercises now, and Taiwan is ramping up military hardware from the USA, it seems to be looking like the showdown is becoming more evident. The sad part is that China will never give up even if there is an altercation and real conflict. Dragon losing eyeball will mean renegade must lose head. I expect it to happen, and luckily enough the USA has enough firepower over in that area to join in. I'm all for Taiwan and wish Tibet and even Hong Kong had their freedom as well. There is no room in this world for the Evil China. 

4 hours ago, Johnnyngai said:

High tax with little in terms of social benefit / social safety net, was what the NYT mean.  

 

 

The way you present it, still sounds unlikely. There are less roundabout ways of prepping the population for war. Then again, kinda hard to discuss an alleged article, and an old one, at that.

20 hours ago, Morch said:

 

The way you present it, still sounds unlikely. There are less roundabout ways of prepping the population for war. Then again, kinda hard to discuss an alleged article, and an old one, at that.

NYT said: High tax with little in terms of social benefit / social safety net. 

 

My own opinion of keeping the population hungry, not lazy.  

23 hours ago, holy cow cm said:

China had said to effect some years ago that unification by 2020 was the must target date. So as they are ramping up military exercises now, and Taiwan is ramping up military hardware from the USA, it seems to be looking like the showdown is becoming more evident. The sad part is that China will never give up even if there is an altercation and real conflict. Dragon losing eyeball will mean renegade must lose head. I expect it to happen, and luckily enough the USA has enough firepower over in that area to join in. I'm all for Taiwan and wish Tibet and even Hong Kong had their freedom as well. There is no room in this world for the Evil China. 

If ordinary Chinese were to have a choice, they would choose the democratic Taiwan.  

If Taiwan were to be in charge of the whole China,  Inner Mongolia, Hong Kong and Tibet would remain a part of China, may be Xinjiang also.  

It is a history thing among their cultural history.  They would just say: it was passed down from our grandfather.       

 

 

On 7/26/2019 at 11:25 AM, Orton Rd said:

Africa has always been part of China,

One bomb on Beijing would stop them in their greedy tracks

During the lean years in the 1960s, Chairman Mao let millions of Chinese starve,

just so there would be enough money to build the first A bomb.  

NYT said: High tax with little in terms of social benefit / social safety net. 
 
My own opinion of keeping the population hungry, not lazy.  

I guess it depends on what you consider social benefit / social safety net, but the US had little of both combined with high taxes in the ‘40s and ‘50s.

13 minutes ago, Johnnyngai said:

During the lean years in the 1960s, Chairman Mao let millions of Chinese starve,

just so there would be enough money to build the first A bomb.  

First time I've read this claim, got any links?

31 minutes ago, Johnnyngai said:

If ordinary Chinese were to have a choice, they would choose the democratic Taiwan.  

If Taiwan were to be in charge of the whole China,  Inner Mongolia, Hong Kong and Tibet would remain a part of China, may be Xinjiang also.  

It is a history thing among their cultural history.  They would just say: it was passed down from our grandfather.       

 

 

Not sure I buy what you said. I know a few Taiwanese people in Taiwan and seems that is not their view.

On 7/27/2019 at 5:27 AM, Traubert said:

China became a predominantly domestic market five years ago. Yeah, it would hurt but there was more than philanthropy driving their aim to pull 650m people out of poverty. Peasants don't spend.

No, it isn't. It's growing at 6.4%p.a. Like Thailand's tourist statistics, people don't differentiate between a  shrinkage and a slowdown in growth. Most countries in the world would love a growth rate similar to China's. Who blinked first in the trade war?

 

I did, 13 years ago. I love it. Then again, I don't get all my information from the western mainstream press and government think tanks.

For people who live in a nice condominium in one of the four first line show case city, life is grand.  

Show case cities are exactly what they are. 

Take the bus 100 miles inland to a third line small cities and there is day and night difference. 

I first meet small city college students on a language exchange website in 2007, 

I have been to 10 small inland cities, my interest is off the beaten path historical sites. 

 

https://new.qq.com/omn/20181104/20181104A15MYC.html   

 links from QQ.com  / same as the USA msn.com  

College graduates living in a third line city, living like a migrant labor.

 

https://new.qq.com/omn/20190714/20190714A0NBVJ00.html#p=1  

Father only has enough money to treat one of his two very sick children, 

a lottery was draw to decide which child get to live.  

 

https://new.qq.com/omn/20190716/20190716A0GIHP00.html#p=1 

Boy picks rotten vegetable to save money for his own doctor bill. 

 

https://new.qq.com/omn/20190718/20190718A06TMA00.html  

Grandma and granddaughter both very sick, grandma stopped her own medical treatment;

 granddaughter is younger and has better use of the limited fund.  

 

Just because I have been living in one of Trump's luxury condominium for 13 years, 

does that mean Americans outside of Trump's area all worth more than 2,000,000 usd ?    

 

 

 

22 minutes ago, holy cow cm said:

Not sure I buy what you said. I know a few Taiwanese people in Taiwan and seems that is not their view.

Taiwanese with mainland root, or Taiwan aborigines. 

Taiwan aborigines want Taiwan to be Taiwan, not China.  

I do not know any Taiwanese myself.  

34 minutes ago, simple1 said:

First time I've read this claim, got any links?

New York Time from more than 10 years ago.  No link.  

48 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

I guess it depends on what you consider social benefit / social safety net, but the US had little of both combined with high taxes in the ‘40s and ‘50s.
 

 

I had some old uncle told me that when they were in school, there was no free school lunch for poor students. 

I had some old uncle told me that when they were in school, there was no free school lunch for poor students. 

There was no free lunch for anyone (as far as I know) when I went to school in SoCal, why should there be?

2 hours ago, Johnnyngai said:

If ordinary Chinese were to have a choice, they would choose the democratic Taiwan.  

Do ordinary Chinese have even a small clue what democratic means?

china are not anywhere near ready to face a US embargo.

 

22 hours ago, Johnnyngai said:

NYT said: High tax with little in terms of social benefit / social safety net. 

 

My own opinion of keeping the population hungry, not lazy.  

 

21 hours ago, Johnnyngai said:

New York Time from more than 10 years ago.  No link.  

 

So not what the "NYT said". More like what you claim a 10 year old unspecified article said. I doubt that the article in question, if it existed, made quite the same points you do - and with the same application. But as there's no reference, hard to tell if it even pertains to thee topic at hand. 

9 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

 

So not what the "NYT said". More like what you claim a 10 year old unspecified article said. I doubt that the article in question, if it existed, made quite the same points you do - and with the same application. But as there's no reference, hard to tell if it even pertains to thee topic at hand. 

Please understand that I am not here to sell any ideas to make a profit. 

I just happens to be in between vacations.  

21 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

There was no free lunch for anyone (as far as I know) when I went to school in SoCal, why should there be?

 

I actually mean free school lunches for low income students grade 1 - 12.