Miscellaneous News

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Actually, the more accurate analogy would be someone who used to be a boxer is now dabbling in MMA. Sure he added non-boxing techniques like kicks and takedowns to his repertoire, but if his jabs and his footwork all look suspiciously like boxing techniques, does it make sense to claim otherwise just because other styles also have those techniques?
Once a boxer throws kicks, take-downs, joint locks, he is no boxer anymore. That is by definition, MMA. A country that does some socialist/Marxist things but also things that are complete counter to it is not socialist/Marxist. The difference is that unlike MMA, there is no pre-existing definition of China's governmental style.
Likewise, the way China treats ethnic minorities and poverty alleviation can be clearly traced to its socialist past.
Poverty alleviate is common sense among ALL countries; but China is more competent. How do you link Marxism with giving ethnic minorities more rights than Hans?
The difference between China's socialism today and what it had before is that China used to treat Marxism like religious dogma, but is now treating it like a scientific theory. Like any scientific theory, you use what works and fix what doesn't.
That's called moving away from Marxism. If you used to live your life by the bible following every word but now you decide to do some things according to it and others not, because they don't work for you, you are, by definition, less devout to the bible.
In particular, the purpose of Marxism for China is to provide a model for running a modern country. The priority of the Chinese leadership can be summarized as follows:

1. Make the Chinese nation strong.
2. Make the Chinese society harmonious.
Those are universal principles and common sense. The second one basically means horizontal development for social stability. What nation doesn't know this?
As such, Marxist principles will be used and applied according to those two priorities.
Those 2 are universal priorities but what was applied are both Marxist, non-Marxist, and even anti-Marxist principles.
And yes, apparently Marx did say that "you can let go of all your SOEs and allow them to become private but you need to hold onto your oil and and banking sectors":
That's a very very loose interpretation of him saying that the state needs to make loans easily available. Did he say that you can let go of all your other SOEs and allow them to become private? How about oil/gas/coal? When people loosely interpret what was said hundreds of years ago and match it to the events today, we get cults saying Da Vinci or the Bible predicted everything thousands of years in advance.
 

Strangelove

Colonel
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

As “unimaginable quantities of Aussie iron ore flood ex-China markets”, global iron ore prices will collapse,

“China absorbs more than a billion tonnes of seaborne iron ore. Australia ships around 700mt there every year. Some large slice of this will be progressively dumped on other markets,”

The bigger hit, however, will be to national income – Australia will reap at least $150 billion this year in export revenue from iron ore, “nearly all” of which will “be wiped out by the combination of volume and price pressure”.

That also gives us a very good guide to what will happen: Nominal growth will be crunched; Inflation and wages will be hit for years; The budget will be a sea of red; Mining stocks will fall; Bonds yields will plunge; AUD will crash,” Llewellyn-Davis warned.

On top of that, Australian house prices “would tumble”, “radically devaluing versus the world via the collapsing currency



Cool, fingers crossed then motherfuckers... :cool:
 

LawLeadsToPeace

Senior Member
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Registered Member

If it were me, supportive policies would mean a boatload of pornography sent to each newlywed couple.

I thought three child policy meant every couple needed to have at least three children. I've clarified it since and it means no more than three children per couple - moving from one child policy to two children and now this. That's very disappointing. I was hoping it would be mandatory for every Chinese couple to raise a farmhouse of kids.

We definitely need more Chinese when we purchase the continent of Australia from Australia's real and de facto master, the United States. I mean think about it. In what way is Australia autonomous from the United States.
Tbh, I wouldnt worry too much about it. Chinese babies arent born to make cheap products to sell to Americans. Plus, it is about time the Chinese population go down. Otherwise there will be too many people to take care of, which will incur a lot of potential economic and social problems.
 

eprash

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

As “unimaginable quantities of Aussie iron ore flood ex-China markets”, global iron ore prices will collapse,

“China absorbs more than a billion tonnes of seaborne iron ore. Australia ships around 700mt there every year. Some large slice of this will be progressively dumped on other markets,”

The bigger hit, however, will be to national income – Australia will reap at least $150 billion this year in export revenue from iron ore, “nearly all” of which will “be wiped out by the combination of volume and price pressure”.

That also gives us a very good guide to what will happen: Nominal growth will be crunched; Inflation and wages will be hit for years; The budget will be a sea of red; Mining stocks will fall; Bonds yields will plunge; AUD will crash,” Llewellyn-Davis warned.

On top of that, Australian house prices “would tumble”, “radically devaluing versus the world via the collapsing currency



Cool, fingers crossed then motherfuckers... :cool:
Well weren't they complainig about Asian immigrants driving up the price of property before should consider it serendipitous
 

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member
"LENS II, the most advanced wind tunnel in the US, has simulated flights up to Mach 7, with the simulation lasting 30 milliseconds. In contrast, the JF-22’s average runtime could reach 130 milliseconds, with a much higher top speed, Han said."

“Our experiment time is much longer than theirs, so the aircraft model can be larger than theirs, and the experiments can be more advanced than theirs. This determines our leading position in the world.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Top