Anyone who rivals Xi in any capacity is a threat to be humiliated, humbled, and/or disappeared. Such a backwards, totalitarian attitude will footgun China's ascent and push Chinese entrepreneurs and braintrust to relocate to one of many other stable societies.
I would wager that most Chinese people fear racism and prejudism towards them more than Ma considering how common and politically popular Sinophobia has become again. Ma is still a billionaire, his position is not attainable for most no matter how they look at it. But Sinophobia is a household thing now.
> I would wager that most Chinese people fear racism and prejudism towards them more than Ma considering how common and politically popular Sinophobia has become again.
I would wager that you are completely wrong for thinking this. Chinese people fear racism and prejudism towards them from whom? The US? Even taking the statement "Sinophobia is common [in the US]" at face value (even though it's wrong), Chinese people living in China care about that as much as Americans care about the vast majority of Africa and the Middle East hating them, which is to say not a whole lot.
And yet you seem very intent on correcting what you think is oh-so-wrong: the rest of the world perceiving the US as a little too pretentious. Could it be that the people of the US might actually care what the rest of the world thinks about their country? Could you possibly imagine the same is true for someone in China?
Not nearly as quickly. Where we had millenials -- the echo of the baby boom -- they had the One Child Policy. That difference is now entering prime earning/spending years.
Would you please stop with this stupidity? Enough. It seriously hurts my brain that every bit of discussion about China devolves into someone regurgitating these thoroughly incorrect, stupid cliches.
China's population is more than 4x America's. If a billion people vanished from China, it would still be more populous than America. America is the one with the demographic problem, not China. China has at least 20 years of urbanization left, with people moving from unproductive agrarian work into the cities.
Furthermore, the government has plenty of policy space to implement pro-natal programs. Before you even think it - no, they work. Coordinated, consistent pro-natal policy can and does routinely lift birth rates.
China is rocketing up the value chain on every single metric. It just installed more industrial robots this year than the rest of the world combined. Investment , both state and private, is pouring into renewable energy, EVs, semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, biotech, aerospace, etc.
China's government, for whatever problems it has, is simply the most effective on competent ever devised. It outclasses every other government on Earth, it isn't even close.
You and your fellow Americans need to open your eyes and understand your diminished and ever-diminishing place in the world.
Could you please not post in the flamewar style to HN? You've been doing it repeatedly in this thread, unfortunately. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.
I realize that it's frustrating to be representing a minority view, but it's not ok to react to that pressure by lashing out at others or breaking the rules here.
You're being a bombastic doofus online, a regular mishap that can happen to anyone. It's still just a mishap, not some heroic battle of truthsayers vs censorship.
Ma's downfall came shortly after Putin suggested that he run for president of China. Coupled with his association with Peter Thiel, Xi decided to reign him in before he could do any real damage.
Milton Friedman thought that a free market was incompatible with a totalitarian state, so once the economy gets freed some sort of liberal government would follow.
Perhaps Xi is the CCP immune reaction to the risk that a freer economy would lead to a freer state.
Hrm... In a YouTube video I'm pretty sure he says that free states can't exist without capitalism but that doesn't mean unfree states can't be capitalist too. In fact this was in response to an audience member claiming he said what you are roughly saying.
> moving back towards an inefficient state controlled economy
Didn't the Soviets go from agrarian to superpower and give the US a merry chase before collapsing? This might be a long arc.
> slow down China's growth and make them much less of a threat.
If I was a dictator and the population was starting to get upset over stalled growth, starting a war would seem to be a great way to generate excuses for economic hardship and crackdowns. Oh, and it would give the factories something to do other than get undercut by Vietnam. War sounds like the answer to all of my problems. I think this situation makes me more of a threat, don't you?
> trick China into behaving stupidly
Remember, they just acquired the world's industrial base. With our encouragement, because we thought it would turn them into a liberal democracy. It, uhhh, didn't. So did we really trick them? Or did we sell them the rope with which they will hang us (to paraphrase the Lenin quote)?
No, the “war as a distraction thing” is an over repeated trope with little nuance or bearing on reality. War doesn’t distract but puts all eyes on you and losing one (which is always a risk) is a sure fire way to lose any power you were looking to keep via distraction anyway.
Societies go to war when they think they can win and achieve political aims. Any distraction is an excuse to do something they were likely to do anyway.
Says the guy whose entire argument is "war is risky." Well, yeah -- and a ruler weighs that risk against the risk of losing legitimacy and power due to a stalling economy. This story has repeated many times in history. That's why it's a "trope."
> political aims. Any distraction is an excuse to do something they were likely to do anyway.
You don't have to read between the lines on Taiwan, you can simply read the lines.
> > moving back towards an inefficient state controlled economy
> Didn't the Soviets go from agrarian to superpower and give the US a merry chase before collapsing? This might be a long arc.
The source for their leap "from agrarian to superpower" came from the satellite states that they had in control, and their usage of 5 year plans to accelerate growth of their heavy industries, at the sacrifice of growth in consumer-oriented industries. Nationally, the USSR was able to catch up quickly to the US after WWII, and likewise pull off some punches to publicly show their superiority in certain fields:
- Internal political resistance to the transistor & computer tech in general made them laggards when it came to alleviating bureaucratic inefficiencies. They were initially on good paces to catch up technologically with the US, but their reliance on reverse engineering & not building up their own advancements meant that the gap would inevitably widen as they'd always be playing catch up to the Western space.
- The lack of development into the consumer-oriented industries compared to the Western sphere in general made the economies of the USSR reliant on the State to shoulder that burden, making them penultimately responsible for placating the wants of the USSR citizens.
- The below-market oil transfer agreements made to keep the USSR sphere of influence together (CMEA/Comecon) came under strain as the USSR was unable to keep growth in their oil production/exports at a consistently high rate.
The first sign of China destroying its own economy came for me when Jack Ma was disappeared.
Chinas economy is now ruined.
The vast majority of foreign companies have left or are leaving. Same with foreign capital.
Massive unemployment and getting worse. People homeless and in poverty.
The real estate ponzi has collapsed. Banks are in trouble.
The construction boom has turned out to be extremely low quality and tofu dreg constructions everywhere are resulting in things like apartment blocks that are falling over and must be abandoned and destroyed.
The tech companies have been hacked down to size, entire industry sectors simply stopped.
In only a few years the China success story has collapsed entirely.
Perfect conditions for a leader who needs distraction to seek it in war.
If you think people in China will become homeless then it means you have massive illusion about Chinese culture, the land policy, and the real estate situation.
Your original post comes across to me as way more of a typical propaganda post then the person you're replying to here. Making huge outrageous claims, all negative about a country, painting an extreme picture, all entirely opinion based without a single piece of data to back up your claims.
It’s a given that people on HN know how the internet works.
It’s also (usually) a given on HN to not post unsubstantiated and pretty controversial claims with no additional interesting or intellectually stimulating context for people for people to discuss, then accuse people of being a “CCP account” when someone points this out.
Edit: and posting a gigantic list of sources as a “gotcha” doesn’t count as additional interesting context, or even words of your own.
Try rephrasing your points in a way that is clearly meant to incite an argument and wouldn’t be best read as if you are shouting.
I am not claiming there is no homelessness, my bad for not conveying the idea clearly. My point was that the economy recession in China and real estate bubble won’t make the homeless situation worse significantly.
We don't allow ad hominem attacks here, Andrew. You made uncited assertions, got an uncited assertion in response, and then made this wonderful contribution to the discussion.
Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
Apart from that, the strong family tie culture in China, and the "Hukou" system(imo it’s not a good system at today), especially the rural type of Hukou granting the usage of lands almost ensures in the end there will be a place for people to live without being homeless.
Will there be economic recession? Likely yes, are there homeless people? Absolutely. Will there be massively increase of homelessness due to this recession in China? It’s very unlikely.
One needs to travel to China and living for months to understand the culture there and how the Hukou separate urban and rural people, and how it’s related to the land policy to understand why it is very hard for China to have massive homeless as much as we had here at SF.
45 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 96.9 ms ] threadI would wager that you are completely wrong for thinking this. Chinese people fear racism and prejudism towards them from whom? The US? Even taking the statement "Sinophobia is common [in the US]" at face value (even though it's wrong), Chinese people living in China care about that as much as Americans care about the vast majority of Africa and the Middle East hating them, which is to say not a whole lot.
This will slow down China's growth and make them much less of a threat.
Sometimes I wonder if this is an own-goal or whether the US uses other means to trick China into behaving stupidly.
Isn't the same happening in the west?
China's population is more than 4x America's. If a billion people vanished from China, it would still be more populous than America. America is the one with the demographic problem, not China. China has at least 20 years of urbanization left, with people moving from unproductive agrarian work into the cities.
Furthermore, the government has plenty of policy space to implement pro-natal programs. Before you even think it - no, they work. Coordinated, consistent pro-natal policy can and does routinely lift birth rates.
China is rocketing up the value chain on every single metric. It just installed more industrial robots this year than the rest of the world combined. Investment , both state and private, is pouring into renewable energy, EVs, semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, biotech, aerospace, etc.
China's government, for whatever problems it has, is simply the most effective on competent ever devised. It outclasses every other government on Earth, it isn't even close.
You and your fellow Americans need to open your eyes and understand your diminished and ever-diminishing place in the world.
I realize that it's frustrating to be representing a minority view, but it's not ok to react to that pressure by lashing out at others or breaking the rules here.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
China is authoritarian. Fact
China is facing demographic shift / collapse. Fact.
Xi is consolidating power is a fact.
Perhaps Xi is the CCP immune reaction to the risk that a freer economy would lead to a freer state.
Didn't the Soviets go from agrarian to superpower and give the US a merry chase before collapsing? This might be a long arc.
> slow down China's growth and make them much less of a threat.
If I was a dictator and the population was starting to get upset over stalled growth, starting a war would seem to be a great way to generate excuses for economic hardship and crackdowns. Oh, and it would give the factories something to do other than get undercut by Vietnam. War sounds like the answer to all of my problems. I think this situation makes me more of a threat, don't you?
> trick China into behaving stupidly
Remember, they just acquired the world's industrial base. With our encouragement, because we thought it would turn them into a liberal democracy. It, uhhh, didn't. So did we really trick them? Or did we sell them the rope with which they will hang us (to paraphrase the Lenin quote)?
Societies go to war when they think they can win and achieve political aims. Any distraction is an excuse to do something they were likely to do anyway.
Says the guy whose entire argument is "war is risky." Well, yeah -- and a ruler weighs that risk against the risk of losing legitimacy and power due to a stalling economy. This story has repeated many times in history. That's why it's a "trope."
> political aims. Any distraction is an excuse to do something they were likely to do anyway.
You don't have to read between the lines on Taiwan, you can simply read the lines.
> Didn't the Soviets go from agrarian to superpower and give the US a merry chase before collapsing? This might be a long arc.
The source for their leap "from agrarian to superpower" came from the satellite states that they had in control, and their usage of 5 year plans to accelerate growth of their heavy industries, at the sacrifice of growth in consumer-oriented industries. Nationally, the USSR was able to catch up quickly to the US after WWII, and likewise pull off some punches to publicly show their superiority in certain fields:
- Internal political resistance to the transistor & computer tech in general made them laggards when it came to alleviating bureaucratic inefficiencies. They were initially on good paces to catch up technologically with the US, but their reliance on reverse engineering & not building up their own advancements meant that the gap would inevitably widen as they'd always be playing catch up to the Western space.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnHdqPBrtH8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLOD5f-q0as
- The lack of development into the consumer-oriented industries compared to the Western sphere in general made the economies of the USSR reliant on the State to shoulder that burden, making them penultimately responsible for placating the wants of the USSR citizens.
- The below-market oil transfer agreements made to keep the USSR sphere of influence together (CMEA/Comecon) came under strain as the USSR was unable to keep growth in their oil production/exports at a consistently high rate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrZ1eMlzwhc
Chinas economy is now ruined.
The vast majority of foreign companies have left or are leaving. Same with foreign capital.
Massive unemployment and getting worse. People homeless and in poverty.
The real estate ponzi has collapsed. Banks are in trouble.
The construction boom has turned out to be extremely low quality and tofu dreg constructions everywhere are resulting in things like apartment blocks that are falling over and must be abandoned and destroyed.
The tech companies have been hacked down to size, entire industry sectors simply stopped.
In only a few years the China success story has collapsed entirely.
Perfect conditions for a leader who needs distraction to seek it in war.
If you think people in China will become homeless then it means you have massive illusion about Chinese culture, the land policy, and the real estate situation.
It’s also (usually) a given on HN to not post unsubstantiated and pretty controversial claims with no additional interesting or intellectually stimulating context for people for people to discuss, then accuse people of being a “CCP account” when someone points this out.
Edit: and posting a gigantic list of sources as a “gotcha” doesn’t count as additional interesting context, or even words of your own.
Try rephrasing your points in a way that is clearly meant to incite an argument and wouldn’t be best read as if you are shouting.
We don't allow ad hominem attacks here, Andrew. You made uncited assertions, got an uncited assertion in response, and then made this wonderful contribution to the discussion.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Apart from that, the strong family tie culture in China, and the "Hukou" system(imo it’s not a good system at today), especially the rural type of Hukou granting the usage of lands almost ensures in the end there will be a place for people to live without being homeless.
Will there be economic recession? Likely yes, are there homeless people? Absolutely. Will there be massively increase of homelessness due to this recession in China? It’s very unlikely.
One needs to travel to China and living for months to understand the culture there and how the Hukou separate urban and rural people, and how it’s related to the land policy to understand why it is very hard for China to have massive homeless as much as we had here at SF.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou
Now we're seeing their Great Turn. [1]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Policy [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Break_(USSR)