Hong Kong

[Galloism]

No, no they couldn’t. Because terrorists are not easily arrested - you’d wind up killing at a minimum 2 or 3 for every one you arrested, because terrorists aren’t known for surrendering peacefully. You’d also probably wind up killing a fair number of civilians.

Not that we’ve never captured terrorists, but it’s usually in spite of their best efforts.

To capture a million terrorists, you’d probably have to kill two or three million, plus you’d probably take out at least several hundred thousand innocents in the process, if you were especially judicious in the use of force.

Has Xinjiang suffered a 20% writedown in their population recently?

Not all terrorists are shooters and suicide bombers you know, lots of them don't directly kill people, they're just part of an organisation aiding and abetting the organisation's murders. We're talking about bodyguards, book-keepers, chemists, bomb-makers, recruiters, preachers, propagandists, not people who'd necessarily kill people directly.

Terroristic bookkeeping. Now I’ve heard everything.

But that’s of Little matter - those who are fanatical to such a cause, even if they’re a bomb maker not a suicide bomber, will not go down without a fight. Even if they’re a recruiter and not a shooter, they won’t just surrender.

You will still kill 2 or 3 for every 1 you capture, plus civilian casualties.

Has Xinjiang suffered a writedown of 20% of their population recently?

[Neko-koku]

Wealth inequality is the result of an open economy that accepts foreign capital investment in the economy, in an open market those with more capital will always be able to leverage that capital to yield returns and accumulate more wealth. There's nothing wrong with that if it means building a society where wealth creation and asset accumulation is free and easy.

However, in the process of that capital investment, investors provide funding for capital goods to be created, machines and R & D and factories all of which stimulate the economy and create growth. So I'm not concerned about wealth inequality at all, what I want to know is about the standard of living of the 80% who aren't in poverty. Hong Kong's HDI ranking is extremely-high as is its median (not mean) household income. That tells me the average person in Hong Kong is yielding the benefits of the society's economic prosperity.

Prosperity that can continue once the Hong Kong Rioters cease their criminality and stop shutting down major commercial hubs like, you know, they're airport. I've had family who wanted to go to Hong Kong for business because some of their portfolio's in HK and couldn't get in because the Rioters shut down their country's airport and their flights got pushed back. It's insane.

The “free market” is not everyone’s God. To much wealth inequality leads to low consumption rates, and social instability.

And yes median income might be high, but so are living costs. Clearly many people living there do not feel things are going well for them. And again it is not all about money.

I support the free market. However the market can't be free if the Leviathan is choking it.

[Novus America]

The “free market” is not everyone’s God. To much wealth inequality leads to low consumption rates, and social instability.

And yes median income might be high, but so are living costs. Clearly many people living there do not feel things are going well for them. And again it is not all about money.

I support the free market. However the market can't be free if the Leviathan is choking it.

This is true, when government connections matter more than merit, the market is not free.

I support generally free markets as well, within reason. But there are other concerns to be considered as well.

[Purgatio]

Not all terrorists are shooters and suicide bombers you know, lots of them don't directly kill people, they're just part of an organisation aiding and abetting the organisation's murders. We're talking about bodyguards, book-keepers, chemists, bomb-makers, recruiters, preachers, propagandists, not people who'd necessarily kill people directly.

Terroristic bookkeeping. Now I’ve heard everything.

But that’s of Little matter - those who are fanatical to such a cause, even if they’re a bomb maker not a suicide bomber, will not go down without a fight. Even if they’re a recruiter and not a shooter, they won’t just surrender.

You will still kill 2 or 3 for every 1 you capture, plus civilian casualties.

Has Xinjiang suffered a writedown of 20% of their population recently?

No, they haven't, thanks to the swift action of the Chinese government in Xinjiang, innocent people have been saved as a result. You should be happy these detention facilities were erected so quickly before more people got hurt.

[Purgatio]

Wealth inequality is the result of an open economy that accepts foreign capital investment in the economy, in an open market those with more capital will always be able to leverage that capital to yield returns and accumulate more wealth. There's nothing wrong with that if it means building a society where wealth creation and asset accumulation is free and easy.

However, in the process of that capital investment, investors provide funding for capital goods to be created, machines and R & D and factories all of which stimulate the economy and create growth. So I'm not concerned about wealth inequality at all, what I want to know is about the standard of living of the 80% who aren't in poverty. Hong Kong's HDI ranking is extremely-high as is its median (not mean) household income. That tells me the average person in Hong Kong is yielding the benefits of the society's economic prosperity.

Prosperity that can continue once the Hong Kong Rioters cease their criminality and stop shutting down major commercial hubs like, you know, they're airport. I've had family who wanted to go to Hong Kong for business because some of their portfolio's in HK and couldn't get in because the Rioters shut down their country's airport and their flights got pushed back. It's insane.

The “free market” is not everyone’s God. To much wealth inequality leads to low consumption rates, and social instability.

And yes median income might be high, but so are living costs. Clearly many people living there do not feel things are going well for them. And again it is not all about money.

Wealth creation and asset accumulation is tangibly important for a person's financial security and stability, sure other things are important but I can't see why they'd be more important than that.

[Galloism]

Wow, this is crazy. Just the headings.

China is using flimsy excuses to lock up its Muslim minority on a huge scale — here are some of the bizarre reasons people are in jail

Setting clocks to two hours after Beijing time.

Using a VPN to do homework.

Showing distinct markers of Islam, like having a beard or wearing a veil.

Exhibiting Muslim behaviours and practices, such as not serving alcohol in restaurants.

Going to religious gatherings.

Sharing digital files of Islamic religious teachings.

Owning computer files to do with Islam or in the Uighur language.

Traveling out of the region.

Knowing people who had traveled out the region.

Communicating with people outside the country via WhatsApp.

Planning a move out of the country.

Visiting one of 26 'sensitive countries'

Attempting suicide while in detention.

Let’s add terroristic timekeeping and terroristic veil wearing to the list.

[Galloism]

Terroristic bookkeeping. Now I’ve heard everything.

But that’s of Little matter - those who are fanatical to such a cause, even if they’re a bomb maker not a suicide bomber, will not go down without a fight. Even if they’re a recruiter and not a shooter, they won’t just surrender.

You will still kill 2 or 3 for every 1 you capture, plus civilian casualties.

Has Xinjiang suffered a writedown of 20% of their population recently?

No, they haven't, thanks to the swift action of the Chinese government in Xinjiang, innocent people have been saved as a result. You should be happy these detention facilities were erected so quickly before more people got hurt.

Innocent people are getting hurt right now by the CCP. Also being killed and having their organs harvested.

Because of setting their watch to terrorism time.

[Purgatio]

No, they haven't, thanks to the swift action of the Chinese government in Xinjiang, innocent people have been saved as a result. You should be happy these detention facilities were erected so quickly before more people got hurt.

Innocent people are getting hurt right now by the CCP. Also being killed and having their organs harvested.

Because of setting their watch to terrorism time.

And where's the evidence for that? I doubt China's security agencies are just opening up their files for the scrutiny of a Business Insider reporter or revealing their tactics for how they identify Uyghur terrorists to the world media.

[Galloism]

Innocent people are getting hurt right now by the CCP. Also being killed and having their organs harvested.

Because of setting their watch to terrorism time.

And where's the evidence for that? I doubt China's security agencies are just opening up their files for the scrutiny of a Business Insider reporter or revealing their tactics for how they identify Uyghur terrorists to the world media.

Human rights watch interviewed eyewitnesses, and examined official Chinese documentation.

https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/09/09/e ... -xinjiangs

It includes the report about terrorism time.

[Purgatio]

And where's the evidence for that? I doubt China's security agencies are just opening up their files for the scrutiny of a Business Insider reporter or revealing their tactics for how they identify Uyghur terrorists to the world media.

Human rights watch interviewed eyewitnesses, and examined official Chinese documentation.

https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/09/09/e ... -xinjiangs

It includes the report about terrorism time.

Interviewed former detainees? Are you kidding me? Obviously a member of a Xinjiang terrorist group is going to have an incentive to fabricate or exaggerate the conditions of China's detention facilities, its in the nature of terrorist organisations to engage in propaganda and information warfare tactics, especially if it helps radicalise others in the region.

[Novus America]

The “free market” is not everyone’s God. To much wealth inequality leads to low consumption rates, and social instability.

And yes median income might be high, but so are living costs. Clearly many people living there do not feel things are going well for them. And again it is not all about money.

Wealth creation and asset accumulation is tangibly important for a person's financial security and stability, sure other things are important but I can't see why they'd be more important than that.

Some people care about freedoms, and justice and things. Not everyone is a pure materialist just because you live in one of the most materialistic societies.

See not everyone thinks like you. You seem to struggle with that.

And you cannot accumulate wealth when your housing costs consume too much of your income.
If you make $5,000 a month and your (bad) housing costs $4,000, you are not actually doing well despite your income.

[Galloism]

Human rights watch interviewed eyewitnesses, and examined official Chinese documentation.

https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/09/09/e ... -xinjiangs

It includes the report about terrorism time.

Interviewed former detainees? Are you kidding me? Obviously a member of a Xinjiang terrorist group is going to have an incentive to fabricate or exaggerate the conditions of China's detention facilities, its in the nature of terrorist organisations to engage in propaganda and information warfare tactics, especially if it helps radicalise others in the region.

Does the Chinese government not have just as much reason to exaggerate or fabricate terrorism charges against them when their true goal is cultural elimination?

Besides, we have satellite photos showing the CCP’s duplicity regarding this exact situation. Why would you assume the people we’ve literally caught falsifying things with documented satellite evidence the ones telling the truth, even though it’s severely implausible, and those we’ve no evidence or even indication that they are lying the liar liar pants on fire?

Isn’t it more likely the people we’ve already caught lying are lying?

[Heloin]

Human rights watch interviewed eyewitnesses, and examined official Chinese documentation.

https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/09/09/e ... -xinjiangs

It includes the report about terrorism time.

Interviewed former detainees? Are you kidding me? Obviously a member of a Xinjiang terrorist group is going to have an incentive to fabricate or exaggerate the conditions of China's detention facilities, its in the nature of terrorist organisations to engage in propaganda and information warfare tactics, especially if it helps radicalise others in the region.

If these concentration camps work and are good, then why would their former inmates be against them?

[Purgatio]

Wealth creation and asset accumulation is tangibly important for a person's financial security and stability, sure other things are important but I can't see why they'd be more important than that.

Some people care about freedoms, and justice and things. Not everyone is a materialist just because you live in one of the most materialistic societies.

See not everyone thinks like you. You seek to struggle with that.

And you cannot accumulate wealth when your housing costs consume too much of your income.
If you make $5,000 a month and your (bad) housing costs $4,000, you are not actually doing well despite your income.

Freedom and justice is good and all that, but its so subjective and contestable and everyone has a different idea of what is and isn't unjust. Honestly, if you're living in a society that's safe, where you can walk the streets without fearing violent criminals will attack you or mug you, where you can get a stable job and education, I don't see how such a person is suffering an injustice. 'Materialism' isn't a separate thing on its own, it can be just to strive for a society where people enjoy financial and wealth security for themselves and their families.

[Purgatio]

Interviewed former detainees? Are you kidding me? Obviously a member of a Xinjiang terrorist group is going to have an incentive to fabricate or exaggerate the conditions of China's detention facilities, its in the nature of terrorist organisations to engage in propaganda and information warfare tactics, especially if it helps radicalise others in the region.

Does the Chinese government not have just as much reason to exaggerate or fabricate terrorism charges against them when their true goal is cultural elimination?

Besides, we have satellite photos showing the CCP’s duplicity regarding this exact situation. Why would you assume the people we’ve literally caught falsifying things with documented satellite evidence the ones telling the truth, even though it’s severely implausible, and those we’ve no evidence or even indication that they are lying the liar liar pants on fire?

Isn’t it more likely the people we’ve already caught lying are lying?

All the satellite imagery proves is that there are detention facilities, which I've never denied, I just think they exist to hold terrorists. Of course China lied about it, look at all the misinformation out there now with slanderous claims of 'ethnic targetting' and 'genocide' and the comparisons to Hitler all without solid evidence, can you blame them for not wanting to be inundated with that tsunami of hyperbole from the rest of the world? I don't.

[Purgatio]

Interviewed former detainees? Are you kidding me? Obviously a member of a Xinjiang terrorist group is going to have an incentive to fabricate or exaggerate the conditions of China's detention facilities, its in the nature of terrorist organisations to engage in propaganda and information warfare tactics, especially if it helps radicalise others in the region.

If these concentration camps work and are good, then why would their former inmates be against them?

Because they are terrorists, you can't trust terrorists.

[Galloism]

Some people care about freedoms, and justice and things. Not everyone is a materialist just because you live in one of the most materialistic societies.

See not everyone thinks like you. You seek to struggle with that.

And you cannot accumulate wealth when your housing costs consume too much of your income.
If you make $5,000 a month and your (bad) housing costs $4,000, you are not actually doing well despite your income.

Freedom and justice is good and all that, but its so subjective and contestable and everyone has a different idea of what is and isn't unjust. Honestly, if you're living in a society that's safe, where you can walk the streets without fearing violent criminals will attack you or mug you, where you can get a stable job and education, I don't see how such a person is suffering an injustice

And today we learned Hitler did nothing wrong.

[Purgatio]

Freedom and justice is good and all that, but its so subjective and contestable and everyone has a different idea of what is and isn't unjust. Honestly, if you're living in a society that's safe, where you can walk the streets without fearing violent criminals will attack you or mug you, where you can get a stable job and education, I don't see how such a person is suffering an injustice

And today we learned Hitler did nothing wrong.

Godwin's Law

[Novus America]

Some people care about freedoms, and justice and things. Not everyone is a materialist just because you live in one of the most materialistic societies.

See not everyone thinks like you. You seek to struggle with that.

And you cannot accumulate wealth when your housing costs consume too much of your income.
If you make $5,000 a month and your (bad) housing costs $4,000, you are not actually doing well despite your income.

Freedom and justice is good and all that, but its so subjective and contestable and everyone has a different idea of what is and isn't unjust. Honestly, if you're living in a society that's safe, where you can walk the streets without fearing violent criminals will attack you or mug you, where you can get a stable job and education, I don't see how such a person is suffering an injustice. 'Materialism' isn't a separate thing on its own, it can be just to strive for a society where people enjoy financial and wealth security for themselves and their families.

Again that is not nearly enough for all people.
A gilded cage is still a cage.

And again many in Hong Kong struggle financially and lack financial security due to absurd wealth inequality, absurd costs of living, and lack of housing.

[Galloism]

Of course China lied about it,

And given they have already proven themselves as willing to lie to advance their agenda, wouldn’t it be logical to think they would lie about who is a terrorist to advance their agenda?

That makes a hell of a lot more sense than capturing a million dangerous terrorists with no significant casualties, which would make the CCP without exception the most accurate and skilled force in the world, barely short of literal X-men.

[Novus America]

If these concentration camps work and are good, then why would their former inmates be against them?

Because they are terrorists, you can't trust terrorists.

You have no evidence they are terrorists. They never even got a trial or conviction.

[Heloin]

If these concentration camps work and are good, then why would their former inmates be against them?

Because they are terrorists, you can't trust terrorists.

You know what, why not?

[Galloism]

And today we learned Hitler did nothing wrong.

Godwin's Law

Hey, he improved the economy of Germany, and most of the German people lived with less crime and more economic prosperity through the bulk of his rule until the very end. Under your criteria, the only thing he did wrong was lose the war.

[Purgatio]

Freedom and justice is good and all that, but its so subjective and contestable and everyone has a different idea of what is and isn't unjust. Honestly, if you're living in a society that's safe, where you can walk the streets without fearing violent criminals will attack you or mug you, where you can get a stable job and education, I don't see how such a person is suffering an injustice. 'Materialism' isn't a separate thing on its own, it can be just to strive for a society where people enjoy financial and wealth security for themselves and their families.

Again that is not nearly enough for all people.
A gilded cage is still a cage.

And again many in Hong Kong struggle financially and lack financial security due to absurd wealth inequality, absurd costs of living, and lack of housing.

Have you never talked to someone in a financially-stable family with a solid real estate and personal asset portfolio, who stands to inherit millions? The financial and wealth security that brings? The ability to make choices in your life free of worrying about money or other economic concerns? The problem with your 'gilded cage' analogy is you pretend that the 'cage' and the 'gildedness' are separate metrics, but they are not. Economic prosperity is liberating in its own way, there's nothing more cage-like than having no options in your life, no option to go to school, get good grades so you can enter a university or enter a career or profession that you are interested in or passionate about. That's a cage in the truest sense of the word.

[Galloism]

Because they are terrorists, you can't trust terrorists.

You have no evidence they are terrorists. They never even got a trial or conviction.

Notably, Human Rights Watch went through China’s court records and found only 16 convictions for terrorism and terrorism-related offenses. None involved violent acts. For the million plus people in prison.

Obtaining information about terrorism court cases in China is difficult. In March 2017, Human Rights Watch searched through all court verdicts available online through China Court Net, a general news site run by the Supreme People’s Court, and the Peking University Law Database in 2016 and found only four cases of terrorism convictions.[55] In addition to these cases, Human Rights Watch learned of about a dozen other individuals who were punished for terrorism-related offenses. None of these 2016 cases indicate that the offenders had perpetrated or were linked to violent acts, all of them were punished for possessing, accessing, and distributing terrorism-related videos or audios.