Lemmy.ml next?

92 upvotes would suggest a lot of people.

But everything you could say about China rings just as true in Europe, in Japan and Korea, in India, in Russia…

Global populations are heading for a heavy sag, but westerners only know how to heckle the Evil Foreigners.

Lots of people, especially the Chinese. The sentiment about work, investment, economic prospects, consumption are all quite bad. The central bank is cutting rates. Just today the government dipped their toes into the helicopter money game. The only thing keeping the party going is exports

This is what a healthy population looks like:

The birthing rates are only dropping, in 15 years all of those people will be to old to work but there are not nearly enough to replace them.

ML anxious attachment style. Banning people for comments they make on other instances is some weeeird little dog behavior.

Is that why I got banned? Makes sense, I do have a tendency to refer to him as Xi Xinpooh

This is not lemmy.ml.

Tankies are just communist cosplayers.

The Tankie actually said something on the lines of, “If you would JUST READ MARX you would know that earning capital is a fundamental cornerstone of communism!”

I’m a communist who doesn’t want to call China a communist country, so I don’t really agree with the person that you were talking to, but your second paragraph does show you haven’t researched communism or its history. The debate of whether societies need to undergo capitalist capital accumulation first to enter communism is about as old as communism, and the history of communism is full of examples of this. It’s the ideological reason why the Russian Socialist Democratic Labor Party split into two wings: the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks, the former believing that the Russian Empire had to undergo capitalism first in other to become communist, and the latter wanting to implement socialism to the primitive almost feudalist Russian empire. Some similar split happened more discreetly inside the Communist Party of China, with Mao implementing socialism directly to the extremely underdeveloped Chinese society, and later Deng Xiaoping opting for the more market-socialism (known now to many as "socialism with Chinese characteristics).

So you may or may not agree whether china is communist, but from your comment it’s clear that you’re very oblivious to the historical and ideological reasons for the argument as to whether china is or isn’t a socialist country and whether they’re on the path to it. It’s good to discuss things and to have opinions, but please get informed before dismissing other people’s opinions on topics they’ve probably dedicated more time than you to studying.

That’s probably the smartest tankie in existence

This is actually hilarious

I mean you can still have private property under communism, it’s the capital making property that’s more owned by the workers themselves, but you can still own things under communism.

Similarly, you can earn capital under communism too, it’s just that the tools for earning said capital aren’t owned by corporations under corporations under CEOs under the 1%. It’s not a cornerstone for sure, but it’s not like communism is anti capital and growth and owning things

Removed by mod

Do you actually realize how little sense this makes? Just realized that the previous comment was sarcastic, I’m taking everything back

America doing ‘bad stuff’ is a comical understatement. Sure, the genocide of native Americans and chattel slavery is “bad”, but it is probably worse than general authoritarian actions. You seem to have them the other way around, or at least imply that.

Both suck. Both have superiority complexes. I have to deal with American superiority complexes, so that paints me as “pro China”.

I’m simply pro unity.

when I pointed out that people had to wait for years to get a car, and bread lines were common

Breadlines weren’t common. Breadlines never took place in the USSR between WW2 ending and Perestroika taking place, you’re being ahistorical. Food supply wasn’t secure for all the population in any nation until the green revolution, the USSR being no exception to that.

Regarding waiting for a car, the soviet economy simply didn’t prioritize car manufacturing. The planning didn’t intend for every citizen to have a car in the 70s or 80s, they didn’t intend to make so many cars, so naturally, the people who had the wealth to buy a car, had to wait in waiting lists to get one, it’s not so hard to understand. There are no waiting lists in capitalism because you can segregate 99% of the population from consuming a particular good simply by making it expensive. In socialism, when you don’t have extreme inequality, most people will have access to purchase power for the vast majority of goods you produce. This in turn means that either you manufacture literally from the start one product for every citizen, or there will be waiting lists, it’s really as simple as that.

When you can’t afford a house in capitalism until you’re 35 (if you can ever afford it) you aren’t technically in a waiting list, so even if there’s only new housing for 5% of the population every year, there will be no “waiting list” because simply the prices will go up until only 5% can afford it. In socialism, the same 5% of housing can be afforded by 50% of people, so the way to allocate the goods is a waiting list instead of priority through wealth accumulation.

Do you really fail to understand this?

Yeah over production of goods is a problem but the ussr was built different. Hungary(where im from) has the second best land for agriculture in all of europe only after ukraine and somehow we still had food rations. Same in ukraine too. They had it even worse.

Neither of those things are true, unless you’re extremely poor, in which case why are you trying to buy an extreme luxury like a private car?

Is that another word for disintegration?

There is no war in Ba Sing SE after all…