Having less cloud-shovelers would be an issue?
Advertisement
by Mongolian Khanate » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:13 pm
by Trotskylvania » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:16 pm
Your Friendly Neighborhood Ultra - The Left Wing of the Impossible
Putting the '-sadism' in PosadismKarl Marx, Wage Labour and Capital
Anton Pannekoek, World Revolution and Communist Tactics
Amadeo Bordiga, Dialogue With Stalin
Nikolai Bukharin, The ABC of Communism
Gilles Dauvé, When Insurrections Die"The hell of capitalism is the firm, not the fact that the firm has a boss."- Bordiga
by Keronians » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:17 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Keronians wrote:
It isn't. Note: investment. I am not using the word production anywhere.
Really, I think a comparison could be made with Spain after 1959, when it began receiving tons of American money in exchange for becoming an ally against the USSR.
The one-policy has ended now. Ended at the start of this year, IIRC.
As for the higher standard of living, that's precisely what their government can obtain, all on their own, without foreign dependence (not to say that having trade with the nations is bad).
No, China cannot improve their standard of living without anyone's help. Not in handouts, obviously, but through cooperative trade and investments. And it will still take decades.
Just as long as it will take to correct their one child policy. Actually, there was half a generation lost or so. That will never come back.
by Sibirsky » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:18 pm
by Sibirsky » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:21 pm
Keronians wrote:Sibirsky wrote:
No, China cannot improve their standard of living without anyone's help. Not in handouts, obviously, but through cooperative trade and investments. And it will still take decades.
Just as long as it will take to correct their one child policy. Actually, there was half a generation lost or so. That will never come back.
That does not require child labour. The economy will not collapse if children are made to go to schools instead of working long hours at dirty factories.
It will take decades. It's true, but my point is that China has the consumer base, and intelligent population, to make it happen without heavily relying on the West for trade. By all means, they should continue to export their goods, but not in such a way that they will collapse without the exports.
As for half a generation being lost, I never denied it. I'm saying that the "want another child" motivation no longer exists, since, they're allowed to have them now. They were idiots with their policy. No denying that. But for the problems associated with the policy to become apparent, it will take another 10-20 years, when those 30-40 year olds are in their 50s.
by Sibirsky » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:22 pm
by Keronians » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:26 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Keronians wrote:
That does not require child labour. The economy will not collapse if children are made to go to schools instead of working long hours at dirty factories.
It will take decades. It's true, but my point is that China has the consumer base, and intelligent population, to make it happen without heavily relying on the West for trade. By all means, they should continue to export their goods, but not in such a way that they will collapse without the exports.
As for half a generation being lost, I never denied it. I'm saying that the "want another child" motivation no longer exists, since, they're allowed to have them now. They were idiots with their policy. No denying that. But for the problems associated with the policy to become apparent, it will take another 10-20 years, when those 30-40 year olds are in their 50s.
Dude, you are missing the point. It's the Chinese government, that is sitting on $2 trillion or so in reserves. The typical Chinese family needs that extra income. They are poor.
The problems with the OCP are already apparent. Less taxpayers and employees. And a shortage of girls. Apparently, more first born are boys? I dunno, but that is what I hear. A shortage of girls. In the tens of millions.
by Sibirsky » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:32 pm
Keronians wrote:Sibirsky wrote:
Dude, you are missing the point. It's the Chinese government, that is sitting on $2 trillion or so in reserves. The typical Chinese family needs that extra income. They are poor.
The problems with the OCP are already apparent. Less taxpayers and employees. And a shortage of girls. Apparently, more first born are boys? I dunno, but that is what I hear. A shortage of girls. In the tens of millions.
I'm trying to say that the Chinese government can use that money it's sitting on to improve the country. Well, more than it's doing now.
As for the second paragraph, yeah. It's a problem in India as well. Many families abort female fetuses before they're born. I was seeing this documentary on the suburbs in Mumbai. A family, where a girl had been born, just said: "we were unlucky. Well, there's always next time". This is what causes the disparity.
by Mongolian Khanate » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:33 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Keronians wrote:
I'm trying to say that the Chinese government can use that money it's sitting on to improve the country. Well, more than it's doing now.
As for the second paragraph, yeah. It's a problem in India as well. Many families abort female fetuses before they're born. I was seeing this documentary on the suburbs in Mumbai. A family, where a girl had been born, just said: "we were unlucky. Well, there's always next time". This is what causes the disparity.
Why would they do that? I want a daughter. A son, also, but I am not going to abort my second child if he/she has the same gender as the first. That's ridiculous.
by Keronians » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:37 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Keronians wrote:
I'm trying to say that the Chinese government can use that money it's sitting on to improve the country. Well, more than it's doing now.
As for the second paragraph, yeah. It's a problem in India as well. Many families abort female fetuses before they're born. I was seeing this documentary on the suburbs in Mumbai. A family, where a girl had been born, just said: "we were unlucky. Well, there's always next time". This is what causes the disparity.
Why would they do that? I want a daughter. A son, also, but I am not going to abort my second child if he/she has the same gender as the first. That's ridiculous.
by Mongolian Khanate » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:44 pm
by Keronians » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:45 pm
Mongolian Khanate wrote:What you guys like is market based economies with high levels of state spending.
Doesn't sound so sexy now, does it?
by Sibirsky » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:50 pm
by Mongolian Khanate » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:51 pm
by LiangLai » Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:03 pm
Liriena wrote:Capitalism, forever and ever.
And, those who support Marxist socialism or Communism, I tell you:
It's easy to be left-wing with someone else's wallet. But, when it is your wallet the one involved, trust me, you'll go back to right-wing in a flash.
Bluth Corporation wrote:Red Indus2 wrote:The Soviet Union was a particularly capitalist state because it had to capitalize by itself and induct those capable of doing so into its apparatus, rather then leave the capitalists to run the economy.
I agree, the Soviet Union epitomized capitalism.
I mean, USSR? What's more capitalist than that? Four capitals, all in a row!
by South Benson » Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:19 pm
by Southern Babylonia » Mon Sep 12, 2011 6:34 pm
by Sociobiology » Mon Sep 12, 2011 7:17 pm
by Rennebourg » Mon Sep 12, 2011 7:54 pm
by Patriqvinia » Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:43 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Keronians wrote:
That does not require child labour. The economy will not collapse if children are made to go to schools instead of working long hours at dirty factories.
It will take decades. It's true, but my point is that China has the consumer base, and intelligent population, to make it happen without heavily relying on the West for trade. By all means, they should continue to export their goods, but not in such a way that they will collapse without the exports.
As for half a generation being lost, I never denied it. I'm saying that the "want another child" motivation no longer exists, since, they're allowed to have them now. They were idiots with their policy. No denying that. But for the problems associated with the policy to become apparent, it will take another 10-20 years, when those 30-40 year olds are in their 50s.
Dude, you are missing the point. It's the Chinese government, that is sitting on $2 trillion or so in reserves. The typical Chinese family needs that extra income. They are poor.
The problems with the OCP are already apparent. Less taxpayers and employees. And a shortage of girls. Apparently, more first born are boys? I dunno, but that is what I hear. A shortage of girls. In the tens of millions.
by Sibirsky » Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:57 pm
Patriqvinia wrote:Sibirsky wrote:
Dude, you are missing the point. It's the Chinese government, that is sitting on $2 trillion or so in reserves. The typical Chinese family needs that extra income. They are poor.
The problems with the OCP are already apparent. Less taxpayers and employees. And a shortage of girls. Apparently, more first born are boys? I dunno, but that is what I hear. A shortage of girls. In the tens of millions.
Sadly, that girl shortage willprobablysurely be remedied by importing enslaved women. Yet another fun side-effect of the one child policy.
by Patriqvinia » Mon Sep 12, 2011 10:00 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Emotional Support Crocodile, Google [Bot], Ifreann, ML Library, Nightingalia, Shearoa, Valentine Z
Advertisement