Hi Quickie,
Also lessen the fat belly, when eating oily food drinking hot tea or water lessen the chance of oil solidifying in your stomach.
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
Also lessen the fat belly, when eating oily food drinking hot tea or water lessen the chance of oil solidifying in your stomach.
The American elites are starting to come around to accepting China as an equal. Regardless, for the shit they've pulled these past 20 years, from the Pivot to Asia to Trumpanzee's shenanigans, they should be made to pay a heavy price before normalisation.
Yes, I think the whole boiling of water thing steams from health reasons when drinking water could litually kills you. Around 1800s London had a bad case of deaths from cholera.
Don't forget in the case of my grand parents and their grand parents. Tap water is almost unheard of. Most people drink their water from their wells.
Also to heat anything up is a chore. (They didn't have electric kettles). The only energy source is fire wood in our villege and the only time you light that up is cooking. So at that time my grandma would boil a large pot of water and pour it in about 8 to 10 flasks. And all of us would drink from that.
solarz
Brigadier
Hot or cold, it all becomes the same temperature in your body.
The coronavirus is a respiratory virus. It goes into your respiratory system. The water you drink goes into your digestive system. Competely separate systems.
Quickie
Colonel
It's the condition of the water before you drink the water into your body that matters. Hot water at 60 to 90 degree C that you pour into your cup/glass will likely be virus free in addition to helping to decontaminate the cup/glass that may already be contaminated with the virus (or other micro-organisms although they may require a higher temperature and longer time to be more effective)
Not exactly. The coronavirus could get stuck in your throat and from there it could easily spread to the respiratory tract by the simple process of the person breathing.
China closed out the year 2020 with a bang, with the completion of China-EU The Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI). There is no doubt Germany has played the leading role to get this agreement completed by the year end and, Ms. Merkel clearly has been the driving force. It's quite notable that Germany has staked out a position that is not aligned with Anglo's black-and-white world-view when it comes to China and Russia, as shown in the cases of Huawei and Nord Stream 2.
This article from Foreign Policy provides some background on Merkel's thinking behind all her China policy. The author is clearly frustrated with her policies. He held out hope for a change in Germany's China policy when Merkel will leave the office this year.
Last year, I asked a diplomat who had worked closely with Angela Merkel for many years to sum up the German leader’s views on China. I was expecting to hear a list of concerns about the country’s authoritarian tilt under Xi Jinping, the plight of the Uighurs, and the role of the state in the Chinese economy.
Instead, the diplomat talked about Merkel’s admiration for China’s economic achievements and her appreciation of the role Beijing had played during Europe’s financial crisis a decade ago, when China bought the bonds of ailing eurozone member states and provided a market in which German firms could continue to thrive. “She has not forgotten this,” I was told.
I was reminded of this conversation in recent weeks as news emerged that Merkel, now in her 16th and final year as chancellor, was pushing other EU member states to approve a major .
The timing of the deal, after a year of escalating tensions between Europe and China and just weeks before the inauguration of U.S. President-elect Joe Biden, to say the least. It is hard not to view it as a geopolitical gift to Beijing and slap in the face to an incoming Biden administration that has vowed to repair trans-Atlantic ties and work more closely with Europe on the strategic challenges posed by China.
But to those who have followed Merkel and her approach to China over the years, the rush to seal a deal with Beijing comes as no surprise. Just a week before news from the investment talks broke, her cabinet approved a draft law that—against the tide in Europe—could open the door for Huawei to play a role in Germany’s 5G network. The law is the culmination of a two-year tussle in which Merkel doggedly resisted pressure from members of her own party, her Social Democrat coalition partners, German intelligence agencies, and key allies, including the United States, to keep Huawei out.
I have heard many theories about why a leader who has a reputation for moral integrity and who grew up under a repressive East German regime that rose from the devastation left by the Nazis continues to embrace China as a partner even as it locks up its Muslim minority in camps and builds a digital surveillance state that would shame the Stasi.
Most of them begin and end with the economic argument: that Germany and its biggest companies are simply too dependent on China for Berlin to risk alienating the Communist Party leadership in Beijing. This is certainly a factor in Merkel’s thinking, as the German diplomat’s comments make clear.
For German carmakers, China is both the present and the future. This year alone, they have invested billions of euros in in China. Other German companies, such as the chemicals group BASF, are also doubling down on the vast Chinese market, ignoring talk of decoupling and betting on an economy that has bounced back faster and stronger than others from COVID-19. If you forced Germany’s biggest firms to choose between China and the United States right now, many would pick China, despite concerns about the hand of the Communist Party in the economy.
But the economic argument alone is insufficient to explain Merkel’s positioning on China. There is also a geopolitical dimension that often gets lost in the discussion.
In a series of speeches over the past few years, Merkel has made clear that she sees Germany as highly vulnerable in a more hostile world of great-power competition. The conclusion she draws from this is that Berlin cannot afford to get on the wrong side of Beijing at a time when its weight, influence, and reach seem bound to increase.
At the in early 2019, Merkel plaintively described Germany’s prospects in this new geopolitical landscape as “poor.” A year later, in a speech at the in Berlin, she talked extensively about Europe’s geographic vulnerabilities. “If you look at what we Europeans have on our doorstep, it looks quite challenging,” she said. “We have Russia and right after that China. China and Russia are moving closer.”
The authoritarians to the east might not be a problem if Europe could count on the United States. But Merkel has also come to the conclusion that Washington is no longer a reliable partner. This is a theme that she touched on in a back in 2017, following the first in a series of disastrous NATO and G-7 summits with Donald Trump. But the past years have only reinforced this view.
Trump did lose to Biden in November. But the number that truly reverberated in Berlin, I am told, was not the 306 electoral votes that put Biden over the top but the 74.2 million votes that Trump received. Trump may soon be gone, but his followers are here to stay. It is only a matter of time before someone else takes up his nativist battle cry. Against this backdrop, the only responsible path forward, in Merkel’s view, is to hedge.
Finally, Merkel sees Germany as a mediating force in the escalating confrontation between the United States and China. Her push to reengage with Beijing on the investment agreement, climate change, and other areas this year was an attempt to show that dialogue with the Chinese leadership still makes sense. In her view, attempts to isolate and contain China can only lead to disaster.
In an increasingly black-and-white world where liberal democracies face an existential challenge from authoritarians and populists, Merkel still sees gray—and not only with China. The bargain she brokered recently with democratic backsliders Hungary and Poland to avert a clash over the EU budget is another example. George Soros accused her of .
Merkel’s approach to China no longer reflects the consensus in Germany or in Europe, where positions have hardened substantially over the past year. Some 71 percent of Germans now have a negative view of China, according to a Pew Research Center published in October. And Merkel can expect political pushback against her plans for the EU-China investment deal.
No one can predict where Germany will come down on China when she leaves the political stage next year. Much will depend on who replaces her, the makeup of the next German government, and how Beijing and the Biden administration position themselves. But Merkel’s own is already set in stone. The history books may not be kind.
Noah Barkin is a managing editor at the Rhodium Group and senior visiting fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States.
This article from Foreign Policy provides some background on Merkel's thinking behind all her China policy. The author is clearly frustrated with her policies. He held out hope for a change in Germany's China policy when Merkel will leave the office this year.
Europe’s year-end investment deal with Beijing is a clear window into the German chancellor’s foreign-policy worldview.
BY | DECEMBER 31, 2020, 2:46 AMLast year, I asked a diplomat who had worked closely with Angela Merkel for many years to sum up the German leader’s views on China. I was expecting to hear a list of concerns about the country’s authoritarian tilt under Xi Jinping, the plight of the Uighurs, and the role of the state in the Chinese economy.
Instead, the diplomat talked about Merkel’s admiration for China’s economic achievements and her appreciation of the role Beijing had played during Europe’s financial crisis a decade ago, when China bought the bonds of ailing eurozone member states and provided a market in which German firms could continue to thrive. “She has not forgotten this,” I was told.
I was reminded of this conversation in recent weeks as news emerged that Merkel, now in her 16th and final year as chancellor, was pushing other EU member states to approve a major .
The timing of the deal, after a year of escalating tensions between Europe and China and just weeks before the inauguration of U.S. President-elect Joe Biden, to say the least. It is hard not to view it as a geopolitical gift to Beijing and slap in the face to an incoming Biden administration that has vowed to repair trans-Atlantic ties and work more closely with Europe on the strategic challenges posed by China.
But to those who have followed Merkel and her approach to China over the years, the rush to seal a deal with Beijing comes as no surprise. Just a week before news from the investment talks broke, her cabinet approved a draft law that—against the tide in Europe—could open the door for Huawei to play a role in Germany’s 5G network. The law is the culmination of a two-year tussle in which Merkel doggedly resisted pressure from members of her own party, her Social Democrat coalition partners, German intelligence agencies, and key allies, including the United States, to keep Huawei out.
I have heard many theories about why a leader who has a reputation for moral integrity and who grew up under a repressive East German regime that rose from the devastation left by the Nazis continues to embrace China as a partner even as it locks up its Muslim minority in camps and builds a digital surveillance state that would shame the Stasi.
Most of them begin and end with the economic argument: that Germany and its biggest companies are simply too dependent on China for Berlin to risk alienating the Communist Party leadership in Beijing. This is certainly a factor in Merkel’s thinking, as the German diplomat’s comments make clear.
For German carmakers, China is both the present and the future. This year alone, they have invested billions of euros in in China. Other German companies, such as the chemicals group BASF, are also doubling down on the vast Chinese market, ignoring talk of decoupling and betting on an economy that has bounced back faster and stronger than others from COVID-19. If you forced Germany’s biggest firms to choose between China and the United States right now, many would pick China, despite concerns about the hand of the Communist Party in the economy.
But the economic argument alone is insufficient to explain Merkel’s positioning on China. There is also a geopolitical dimension that often gets lost in the discussion.
In a series of speeches over the past few years, Merkel has made clear that she sees Germany as highly vulnerable in a more hostile world of great-power competition. The conclusion she draws from this is that Berlin cannot afford to get on the wrong side of Beijing at a time when its weight, influence, and reach seem bound to increase.
At the in early 2019, Merkel plaintively described Germany’s prospects in this new geopolitical landscape as “poor.” A year later, in a speech at the in Berlin, she talked extensively about Europe’s geographic vulnerabilities. “If you look at what we Europeans have on our doorstep, it looks quite challenging,” she said. “We have Russia and right after that China. China and Russia are moving closer.”
The authoritarians to the east might not be a problem if Europe could count on the United States. But Merkel has also come to the conclusion that Washington is no longer a reliable partner. This is a theme that she touched on in a back in 2017, following the first in a series of disastrous NATO and G-7 summits with Donald Trump. But the past years have only reinforced this view.
Trump did lose to Biden in November. But the number that truly reverberated in Berlin, I am told, was not the 306 electoral votes that put Biden over the top but the 74.2 million votes that Trump received. Trump may soon be gone, but his followers are here to stay. It is only a matter of time before someone else takes up his nativist battle cry. Against this backdrop, the only responsible path forward, in Merkel’s view, is to hedge.
Finally, Merkel sees Germany as a mediating force in the escalating confrontation between the United States and China. Her push to reengage with Beijing on the investment agreement, climate change, and other areas this year was an attempt to show that dialogue with the Chinese leadership still makes sense. In her view, attempts to isolate and contain China can only lead to disaster.
In an increasingly black-and-white world where liberal democracies face an existential challenge from authoritarians and populists, Merkel still sees gray—and not only with China. The bargain she brokered recently with democratic backsliders Hungary and Poland to avert a clash over the EU budget is another example. George Soros accused her of .
Merkel’s approach to China no longer reflects the consensus in Germany or in Europe, where positions have hardened substantially over the past year. Some 71 percent of Germans now have a negative view of China, according to a Pew Research Center published in October. And Merkel can expect political pushback against her plans for the EU-China investment deal.
No one can predict where Germany will come down on China when she leaves the political stage next year. Much will depend on who replaces her, the makeup of the next German government, and how Beijing and the Biden administration position themselves. But Merkel’s own is already set in stone. The history books may not be kind.
Noah Barkin is a managing editor at the Rhodium Group and senior visiting fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States.
Soros. The man that tried to use his capital to control China's policy movements. CCP told him to get fucked, cut off his throbbing boner and attempts to infiltrate China's controlled economy and subsequently lost many billions. Soros has had a personal vendetta against the CCP ever since.
That was a great example of a positive in China's authoritarianism working for the common good... one that works for its own interests (which may not always be benevolent for all) which aligns with all Chinese people in this case and certainly does not let western capitalists take control. It's not racist or anything look at Jack Ma and countless Chinese billionaires. Billionaires get most of their wealth but the moment they try anything funny, they often need to get power checked. Foreign billionaires? Doubly so because their motives are just that much more questionable. Another reason foreign billionaires who basically control the narratives and policy in western nations have so much hate for the CCP. They're investments into China are allowed to a certain limit and that capital is used to develop China is every way but while they get repaid handsomely, their influence are capped by the CCP.
China is one of the world's last remaining nations that have kept out the snakes. It's certainly the nation with the most "resources" that the modern day imperialists want to loot and plunder. North Korea, Iran are well defended. Smaller nations are already there whenever. Russia is yet another China level example and look at the amount of propaganda directed against it and its government. They've been doing it to Latin American nations and currently working on Venezuela. Once the power vacuum gets there, the plundering begins. North Africa, Arab nations, Middle East all done.
That was a great example of a positive in China's authoritarianism working for the common good... one that works for its own interests (which may not always be benevolent for all) which aligns with all Chinese people in this case and certainly does not let western capitalists take control. It's not racist or anything look at Jack Ma and countless Chinese billionaires. Billionaires get most of their wealth but the moment they try anything funny, they often need to get power checked. Foreign billionaires? Doubly so because their motives are just that much more questionable. Another reason foreign billionaires who basically control the narratives and policy in western nations have so much hate for the CCP. They're investments into China are allowed to a certain limit and that capital is used to develop China is every way but while they get repaid handsomely, their influence are capped by the CCP.
China is one of the world's last remaining nations that have kept out the snakes. It's certainly the nation with the most "resources" that the modern day imperialists want to loot and plunder. North Korea, Iran are well defended. Smaller nations are already there whenever. Russia is yet another China level example and look at the amount of propaganda directed against it and its government. They've been doing it to Latin American nations and currently working on Venezuela. Once the power vacuum gets there, the plundering begins. North Africa, Arab nations, Middle East all done.
Last edited: