Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
Just read a news that EU won’t pay Montenegro’s debt to china for infrastructre construction. Why would China waste so much money on these bankrupt nations who are ungrateful and instead blame china itself by calling it debt trap diplomacy. She should instead invest these money on itself on science/technology or may be give it for free for constructing infrastructure for neighbouring nations or may be poor african nations.
Or build more underground nuke shelters and tunnels...
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Go back count up your likes in this conversation (all the way into the COVID thread) that I got then the number you got. Two people each saying each other's reasoning is dismal is pointless; a drunk homeless nutjob can hold his own against an astrophysicist like that. Ask the crowd.
I already said that billionaires aren't necessary for the existence of an economy or its innovation but they are if you are competing with a rival country (especially a superpower) in cutting edge tech. He's using both his hands; the government and the billionaire megacorps. You can't beat him with one hand tied behind your back. It's not whether or not you can move forward but if you move forward slower than him, you lose. Failing to internalize this and the meaning of "necessary" in context shows very poor reading comprehension.
Reread:
Chinese Economics Thread
You goofed again. You took out the word "technological" before the innovation and it made things so different. Billionaire businesses have their innovations like lithography, jet engines, supercomputers, etc... and small businesses have their innovations, like noodle splash mouth-guard, humane...
www.sinodefenceforum.com
But you don't know what "leash" means so you might as well put an imaginary word to form an imaginary sentence like Trump.
Here you go, you can reread that:
"Curbed, tacked, leashed, whatever word you want to use, it means nothing if you cannot define it in your context."
Asking you what you mean is wasting time at this point because not only do you not know, you're getting bold about not knowing, like you're not supposed to know exactly what you're talking about; you can just give some general direction that anybody can interpret in any way LOL "Covfefe! I don't know every detail of what it means; you guys figure it out! I'm right and it stands!" LOLOL
It's gonna be funny to see you make a fool out of yourself again trying LOL
Fairchild Semiconductor had a net worth of $1.58 billion as of 2015. In 2016, they were purchased for $2.4 billion by ON Semiconductor. Pretty big numbers for a tiny company... Apple pretty much started the same way, and both companies became billion dollar companies because they were successful. I never said that a few people with vision can't create a billion-dollar company from scratch; I admire and support that. That is happening more in China than in any other country and that makes me proud. In the global tech race, you either become a billion dollar company to compete or a billion dollar company will eat you up... or both.
I'm not even going to bother fact-checking this 1791 crap. Tech was much simpler and there was far less competition. This is over 200 years later; we are talking about modern tech. What are you gonna do next, tell me that the best sword-makers in the Xia Dynasty were just blacksmiths instead of megacorps? LOL
Oh crap; you actually went back to the 10th century to try to find cases where a non-megacorp created cutting edge technology of the time, which you know, is simple enough for a child's high school project today. And also, you know, billionaires and corporations didn't exist so they can't swallow the small guy like they do today.
You mean the exact 3 that you just laid out? LOL Yes they are. They were funny and so was your pathetic attempt to go back over 1,000 years to try to discredit the role of megacorporations in today's modern technology.
And guess what? Even if you somehow managed to find a modern example, it doesn't matter because it would be an outlier against a trend, and the trend is undeniably that megacorps rule modern cutting edge tech and small businesses can't compete.
Stands in quicksand. Not necessary for general economics of a small town and for 1,000 year old science. But to compete in modern tech against an adversary nation that employs them and the government, very necessary. Guess which situation China is in today.
Here you go, you can reread that:
"You don't know what it actually takes for billionaires to "get too powerful," and above the control of the CCP and you don't know what it means to "curb" them. You don't know the exact problem you want to solve and of course you don't have a solution either. Essentially, you spent 2 days dodging questions you cannot answer and posted dozens of rants that all mean nothing."
Last edited:
I had a moderate windfall when I sold my shares in "Westland Milk Products" to Yilli. which was a Chinese dairy conglomerate a couple of years ago. I used the money with a NZ online share broker Hatch to purchase NIO, Amazon, and Atlassian shares in the later half of last year.
Being a little concerned that NIO might be forced to leave the U.S. market and with the news they may list on the HK exchange, I used"Tiger "brokers to have a look around the HK exchange with the intent on purchasing my NIO shares in HK. I don't know if it's because on how the HK exchange is run, "Tiger " have a minimum amount of shares one has to buy which is dependant on the current market value of the targeted shares. That kinda irritates me because I don't think it applies to the NYSE.
By the way the "Polestar" which Geely has a connection with looks like a pretty nice car.
That story is strange.
China should avoid these dishonest countries which in one hand take Chinese loans and with the other it is slapping it by loudly slandering China that its loans are a "debt-trap"
The US starts to get a bit nervous about China's digital currency.
See the archived article .
Meanwhile, Kenneth Rogoff considers the threat that the modernization of China’s exchange-rate arrangements could deal the dollar’s status a painful blow.
See the archived article .
Meanwhile, Kenneth Rogoff considers the threat that the modernization of China’s exchange-rate arrangements could deal the dollar’s status a painful blow.
@weig2000 hahahaha, the US oligarch is getting scared, If you read the news billionaire Peter Thiel want the US gov't to take control of bitcoin against the Chinese....LOL even though he owned a lot of it. It's all about scarcity and control that is the business model of the US business elites.