Chinese Economics Thread

[Blitzo]

Good or bad the articles I post are reporting actual news that happened not opinion pieces of some individual.
If you don't like what is happening too bad but that is reality.
If there was a forum about American mass shooting I would have enough to post there too which will get some people upset but again that is reality.

Kusanagi Motoko in the anime Ghost in the Shell said it quite eloquently;

LOL dude, there's nothing wrong with anyone posting negative news about any subject XYZ, but let's get real here and everyone admit that different people sit on different sides of lines of opinion, and that leads to certain patterns of posting as well (for instance, when's the last time you've posted anything positive about the Chinese economy in this thread?)

Personally I don't have any problem with you or anyone else choosing to post mostly news which has a negative portrayal of China in whatever way (or vice versa!), and that's why I've never bothered to bring up forum rules against you or other members whose posts could may well constitute country bashing or chest thumping, or insulting govts or a nation's people... this is because both sides of the argument constantly contravene these rules in discussions. I myself do not claim to be unbiased in my postings either.

But what I do have a problem with, is hypocrisy, when any one side of a debate claims that their posting pattern is meant to be reflective "of reality" as if that means they are therefore unbiased.


All sides should simply acknowledge where they stand, admit they have certain biases, and proceed along.

 

[manqiangrexue]

As I've said before, Samurai, I don't mind when people post articles that seem to suggest that China will encounter troubles, but it is when they interpret them way over the top, or when they directly fail to read them, using them as evidence of something that the original text doesn't suggest at all that begins to sully the forum.

As you said, the truth is the truth, and I see the truth of China's rise in all of the big trends. I like the truth more than just fine. But why are you so ironic, Samurai? Why would you try to discredit China (often by misinterpretations), and then get offended when people point out a truth about the Japanese business model? And this happens mere hours from each other. Certainly, you're not too dull to see how ironic that is? You accuse others of not liking reality when you tell other people to "shut it" when they point out a reality to you? Nobody else could make you look more childish than you can do unto yourself. But then again, maybe that's the quality to expect from someone who bothers to quote a cartoon character??? I mean seriously, are you adult? Do you see other people quoting Bugs Bunny or Donald Duck here on a thread about the economy? LOL I recommend you stop doing this to yourself, really.

 

[broadsword]

Good ............

Rich!!!

 

[Yvrch]

Good or bad the articles I post are reporting actual news that happened not opinion pieces of some individual.
If you don't like what is happening too bad but that is reality.
If there was a forum about American mass shooting I would have enough to post there too which will get some people upset but again that is reality.

Kusanagi Motoko in the anime Ghost in the Shell said it quite eloquently;

Maybe you chose a wrong moniker.
Every time I challenged you with facts, you scurried away like a frightened little mouse and didn't hear a peep back from you.
And then you brought in yet another one and once again I challenged you with facts and context, I heard no direct replies, except your fuzzy theory of life.
One milk toast samurai indeed.

As for your little side show partner who directly quoted me even though I have publicly stated that I don't really appreciate inserting herself on my posts and she is on my ignore list, all I have to say is: show me you are capable of shame.

 

[AssassinsMace]

This issue had been on my mind and I am glad you brought it up because it warrants a robust debate about such issues.
What had been troubling me is that I am sensing attempts by specific interest group to shut down discussions or news that are not perceived as complementary towards China. The narrative is framed as country bashing. On the other hand if this is the standard of determination then the argument can be made that complementary news are simply nationalistic chest thumping.
The question I have for you is why does sharing news that are not complementary considered against forum rules? Please don't just state that it is your opinion because such a position warrant justification.
The rules are not designed to suit ideological agenda but to keep the decorum within the forum. IMO it requires exercise of maturity and professionalism if one wish to engage and participate actively. Problem arise when these attributes are absent. Traditionally, one either ignore the post or provide a cogent rebuttal. The main failure I see is resorting to personal attacks which in my view is a sign of personal weakness.

Funny I see the same thing from the notorious suspects when anything positive is said about China.

 

[Brumby]

I don't regard sharing of news that are not complementary to China as country bashing. Heck, anyone can do that, including pro-China guys like me. It is important to get the true picture of China, but when one cares only to post the negative reportings, it speaks of his intent. And if he is someone whose country had been an aggressor, I have reason to be suspicious. There is a world of difference.

There are two main problems with your statements which I suggest you clarify. Firstly, are you suggesting that SB is exercising malicious intent through his postings? Do you have any evidence beyond your personal suspicion because such expression is libellous in nature if not grounded? Secondly, you seem to be suggesting (through your earlier post) that having a political leaning and preference in posting are grounds subject to restriction or censorship in accordance with forum rules. Do you wish to withdraw it or sustain it as you have opened up a conversation that warrant some form of closure? If you wish to sustain it, I suggest you make your case and state your reasoning.

It has nothing to do with professionalism.

Professionalism is about staying the course based on facts and not making ungrounded assertions or accusations. It is about respecting other posters even if they don't align to your world view and most importantly not resorting to personal attacks. It is about conduct and behaviour.

But what I do have a problem with, is hypocrisy, when any one side of a debate claims that their posting pattern is meant to be reflective "of reality" as if that means they are therefore unbiased.

I think we should be sensible and matured enough to acknowledge that we all hold certain political ideology and that invariably is reflected in different forms through our expressions. However I don't believe hypocrisy is the subject of the conversation here but rather whether having a political leaning is subject to censorship or suppression as seems to be the directed effort so far.

 

[broadsword]

There are two main problems with your statements which I suggest you clarify. Firstly, are you suggesting that SB is exercising malicious intent through his postings? Do you have any evidence beyond your personal suspicion because such expression is libellous in nature if not grounded? Secondly, you seem to be suggesting (through your earlier post) that having a political leaning and preference in posting are grounds subject to restriction or censorship in accordance with forum rules. Do you wish to withdraw it or sustain it as you have opened up a conversation that warrant some form of closure? If you wish to sustain it, I suggest you make your case and state your reasoning.



Professionalism is about staying the course based on facts and not making ungrounded assertions or accusations. It is about respecting other posters even if they don't align to your world view and most importantly not resorting to personal attacks. It is about conduct and behaviour.


I think we should be sensible and matured enough to acknowledge that we all hold certain political ideology and that invariably is reflected in different forms through our expressions. However I don't believe hypocrisy is the subject of the conversation here but rather whether having a political leaning is subject to censorship or suppression as seems to be the directed effort so far.

As I suggested before, you should go through his postings. There are plenty of examples to show his inclinations. Libellious? WTF!!! There is nothing to withdraw for closure. My reasoning has been stated in an earlier post.

 

[Blitzo]

I think we should be sensible and matured enough to acknowledge that we all hold certain political ideology and that invariably is reflected in different forms through our expressions. However I don't believe hypocrisy is the subject of the conversation here but rather whether having a political leaning is subject to censorship or suppression as seems to be the directed effort so far.

My position on using forum rules to shut down other people, is that I personally prefer to avoid doing so, because even though there are many members who I think do a good job of crossing certain rules, I don't think we need to be particularly sensitive to it, because sometimes those individuals offer interesting discussions.
I have no issue with others using the rules as a basis for arguing certain individuals have been insulting countries, or bashing govts or a nation's people etc, so long as there's evidence for it.
In other words I have no problem with what t2contra is accusing samuraiblue of, even if I personally would not accuse samuraiblue of it myself... so for me, t2contra's attempts at "censorship and suppression" are not a conversation I am a part of.

But I did have issue with samuraiblue's "holier than thou" attitude that his postings "reflect reality" therefore insinuating he's somehow not biased and coming from a particular position.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

But I did have issue with samuraiblue's "holier than thou" attitude that his postings "reflect reality" therefore insinuating he's somehow not biased and coming from a particular position.

What ever you what to think that is your own opinion, not mine since I really haven't wrote my opinion on those article pieces I posted.

 

[Brumby]

My position on using forum rules to shut down other people, is that I personally prefer to avoid doing so, because even though there are many members who I think do a good job of crossing certain rules, I don't think we need to be particularly sensitive to it, because sometimes those individuals offer interesting discussions.

Rules are important to ensure civility in the discussions. It is an instrument to govern behaviour but not as an instrument to suppress others. If the rules are broken then it is the role of moderators to intervene. The question is whether manifestation of a political leaning constitute contravention of forum rules as alluded by t2contra. Since such an accusation has been made, it is reasonable to expect that t2contra clarify his position and the basis of his accusation. In my view "suspicion" is not an unrestricted passport, it requires something more substantive which unfortunately is not forthcoming.

I have no issue with others using the rules as a basis for arguing certain individuals have been insulting countries, or bashing govts or a nation's people etc, so long as there's evidence for it.
In other words I have no problem with what t2contra is accusing samuraiblue of, even if I personally would not accuse samuraiblue of it myself... so for me, t2contra's attempts at "censorship and suppression" are not a conversation I am a part of.

I am not directly accusing t2contra of actually attempting to suppress (not yet) but nevertheless it will have such effect if accusation is rested simply on "suspicion". Hence it is important to clearly understand where t2contra is coming from and the basis of such accusation and whether it is warranted.

But I did have issue with samuraiblue's "holier than thou" attitude that his postings "reflect reality" therefore insinuating he's somehow not biased and coming from a particular position.

I am a bit baffled why you have an issue with SB's comment of "reflect reality" and concluding such a statement in respect of the article is somehow insinuating a position other than neutrality. Please help me to understand your reasoning.
If we go to ground zero, the article basically describes the recent events of the Chinese stock market, the peak and trough and how it has impacted small investors. How is the article not reflecting reality or "facts"?

As I suggested before, you should go through his postings. There are plenty of examples to show his inclinations. Libellious? WTF!!! There is nothing to withdraw for closure. My reasoning has been stated in an earlier post.

Inclination or political leaning is not ground for accusation of breaking forum rules. If such a rule exist, then I am completely ignorant of it and would welcome that you point it out.

As to your reasoning, so far it appears to me is predicated on "suspicion". I have asked that you clarify your position but "WTF" is unfortunately a rather incredulous answer.