Netanyahu: "do you condemn Hamas?"
Meloni: "do you celebrate Mussolini?"
Netanyahu: "ye... Wait what. Why would I do that, even if I was a nazi, I'd still have higher standards than to celebrate that useless loser"
Meloni:
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Meloni: "do you celebrate Mussolini?"
Netanyahu: "ye... Wait what. Why would I do that, even if I was a nazi, I'd still have higher standards than to celebrate that useless loser"
Meloni:
Ant Financial packaged up and securitized the consumer loans that it gave out and sold the loan-backed securities to investors while taking a slice of the loan payments. In this way, Ant Financial transferred all loan default risks to investors while keeping a slice of the repayment stream. This meant that the incentive for Ant Financial was to create as much loans (risks) as it can since it did not bear any of the downside risks.
This should be ringing alarm bells for anyone that witnessed the Great Financial Crisis as this was exactly what happened with securitized subprime mortgages in the US that nearly led to the collapse of the entire Western financial system. In the aftermath of the GFC, most nations (including China) issued regulations that required issuers of loan-backed securities to keep some fraction of the loan risks on their books. Ant Financial and Jack Ma knowingly broke these regulations and had no intentions of complying with the regulations until the government finally took action.
Tony Seba's prediction of battery prices dropping to $50/kWh by 2027 is about to happen 3 years early
One of the big things people don't realize about BEVs vs ICE powered vehicles is the recycle ability. Lithium and sodium are elements. No matter how many times you build/recycle/build/recycle, then will always remain lithium and sodium. Always. Crude oil, once refined and burned, will never be crude oil again. Ever - hillmans69 (YouTube comments)
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Thanks for your post, it was well articulated, and that I appreciate.
State invention to me, in the West, has been totally abused, and it is just to rig the game, to put it mildly.
There is one point, in your post, that was not brought up.
And that is the reason why I am still against state intervention for the most part.
No one really knows anything about the future. No one knows what side effects of a policy would do.
We can talk about these externalities, but that has already been done ages ago. That is straight out of the textbook.
In the real world, state intervention seems brutal.
One good example, and I still do know if it was good or not, was the government taking action against Jack Ma Ant Financial. I would assume a lot of small timers, who had no access credit, who now had access to credit, no longer had access to credit.
Now we can say something that type of lending could cause externalities, or be a threat to the banking system, or being unregulated could be an unfair playing field, but that sounds more like excuses.
To this day, no one can prove conclusively in any way that the restrictions on Ant Financial were good or not.
Who was the state trying to protect in the case of Ant Financial? I don't know.
We heard theoretical answers in the past, but the world is real, a textbook answer does not cut it IMHO.
So, state intervention too many times just seems like heavy handiness of the state for no reason at all, other than being a nanny. To protect ourselves, from ourselves.
That is what I really do not like.
This idea of externalities, and Liberal ideology, has turbo charged the nanny state.
That is a real danger to China I feel.
You just do not want to go down that road. You just don't.
I’m sorry, but that’s just regurgitating the loaded propaganda of the rich and powerful designed to fool the poor to act against their own best interests to take power from a benevolent state trying to protect them and give that power to the capitalists desperate to exploit them. Donald Trump is the poster child of the free market approach. He will send his lawyers in to bankrupt you in court and win by default even when everyone involved knows full well he is wrong. That is exactly the world the rich and powerful capitalists in the west wants, where their (usually inherited) wealth can buy them anything and everything they can dream of, and where they can use their wealth to destroy anyone who stands in their way.
If someone had a Time Machine and went back to introduce regulato prevent the Subprime financial crash, you can make the same airy arrangements about no one knowing the future so no one should do anything to stop the rich from doing plainly wrong and stupid shit.
All this hand wringing about state intervention being ‘brutal’ just sound naive and ignorant, as if free market collapses are a piece of cake. And you only need to look back at recent history to see how the capitalists are magically all for state intervention to bail them out of messes they themselves created from their own greed and hubris.
It’s funny you use the term ‘nanny state’, which was coined to attack the NHS. Look to America’s free market solutions before complaining about how bad the NHS is.
However, you do make some good points that state intervention should be minimised, and that is exactly what China does. It only acts to pre-empt major issues. The key impact of the Chinese system is less that the state jumps in and corrects everything, but rather its moderating impact in getting business and the rich and powerful to check their own worst impulses in the first place.
If you look at things purely logically, China is actually less interventionist than most western capitalist countries. For all their PR BS sound bites, western governments actually directly intervene in global markets far more than China’s government. The big difference is that when the Chinese government intervenes, it does so to benefit society at large. But when western governments intervene, it’s usually to protect the interests of rich capitalists who legally bribed the politicians.
Rather than being ideologically committed to ‘intervention’ or ‘free market’, it’s far more reasonable to look at why governments are intervening in the first place.
Hilarious that the local media has basically abandoned their cause now that more details have come about
Just because you aren't James Bond and you don't call it spying, doesn't mean other countries don't feel you're spying, even if they're you're friends.
edit:
The adult version of "Derek's mom lets him eat dinner in front of the TV! Why can't I?!"
Last edited:
