Strong border guards will not solve that problem unless a country mobilizes their entire population. Industrial countries want to get rich by being productive economies then keep everybody else poor by being low productive economies, won't work and eventually something will give. You can't skew the global economic system in your favor and expect nothing to happen.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Sorry, but humanoid robot can also solve that problems so it does not need to mobilise entire population. It's Darwin rules that poor countries will be eliminated.
Eliminated by who? You? LOL! I love the internet, neckbeards and nobodies get to live out their fantasies.
Stop watching too much television son, it's bad for you.
Last edited:
Dude maybe chill out a bit and rethink what you just said. Even if we think in pure Machiavellian fashion, China still need those poor countries to become rich to afford Chinese products. You're letting people debate yourself into a hole here
wuguanhui
Junior Member
I don't know why you guys are being so asinine about an African who wants to see Africa industrialise. It's a matter of national self respect. The biggest leverage they have is their natural resources so it's completely expected they offer that in return for factories.
Developing countries absolutely should have tariff barriers to promote industrialization. There's a big reason why many Africans are fans of the CCP, they want to learn from them. I find African commentators are a lot less delusional than Indians, they aren't fantasizing about supapowa 20xx.
That said, I predict that economies like Australia (exports raw materials/low manufacturing) are going to do a lot better than economies like Europe (few raw materials/strong manufacturing) because being primarily a raw materials exporter means you aren't in a hunger games manufacturing death match with Guangdong.
Developing countries absolutely should have tariff barriers to promote industrialization. There's a big reason why many Africans are fans of the CCP, they want to learn from them. I find African commentators are a lot less delusional than Indians, they aren't fantasizing about supapowa 20xx.
That said, I predict that economies like Australia (exports raw materials/low manufacturing) are going to do a lot better than economies like Europe (few raw materials/strong manufacturing) because being primarily a raw materials exporter means you aren't in a hunger games manufacturing death match with Guangdong.
Australia and New Zealand might be the two Anglo nations most insulated from the upcoming crisis, at the terrible cost of falling into the Chinese sphere. But I suppose with China's manufacturing, the conversion rate between NZ wool and Australia ore to manufactured goods will be high enough to ensure a comfortable life for both nations citizens.
Developing countries should co-plan their industrialization with China, so that China does not swallow their industries whole. China could even partition out several sectors that those nations would monopolize. Ultimately, if the goal for both China and the developing country is balanced trade, such a goal can only be accomplished via coordination.
Tbh, as the industry becomes more and more capital-intensive, and profit margins drop as a result, the ratio of raw materials to finished goods tilts in the factor of the raw material exporter, unless the owner of such industry chooses to monopolize those goods. The western countries often monopolize technology in order to keep the price artifically high, but in theory, a manufacturing economy should see its profits frittered away by heavy capital investment.
It's a notable and funny tic with Trump. Any number - no matter what it means - always has to get bigger.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Because this time, it would help the US.
Because it serves China to always make the US fail and spend more time and resources on face-saving efforts. If they succeed, it will be good for the US economy. So we prevent its success.
Yes but Trump is only good because he's stupid and his plans have high backfire rate, so to capitalize, we need to make them backfire. Trump is not good because he's kind or pro-China; Trump is not good for China if his plans work. They need to fail.
Yes, but using the time between now and 2028, we should gain as many advantages on the US and make them fail as often as possible. After 2028, we can fight India again; but before 2028, this clown can be on our side harming our main rival the USA.
There is no such thing as a long term concession that binds Russia to China. They can reneg and ban anytime. To prevent Russia from joining the West, you must keep our interests aligned and aligned against Western interests. Forced concessions do nothing except make Russia remember that China took a pound of flesh from them when we were supposedly their partner fighting together the hardest common fight of our nations' histories.
And once again, they don't have to keep fighting. What if they take a deal to keep their gains and stop? They don't want to make any concessions to you. Now the war is over. What will you do then?
That's why we bolster Russia to keep fighting. We ask no concessions but fuel them and make them feel that everything offered is not enough because they can take more by force and with Chinese support. And they keep fighting and the problems for the West continue. The best and only way to ensure that Russia stays aligned with China is to continue this war so they can never reconcile with Europe or the US. No concessions will do but this will because it will keep Russian and Chinese interests aligned against Western interests.
So let's go back to here: "they don't have to keep fighting. What if they take a deal to keep their gains and stop? They don't want to make any concessions to you. Now the war is over. What will you do then?" In this situation Russia can truly start to drift West.
Last edited: