World news and politics.

[Sharkman84]

Problem solved?! Hahahahaha.

Let's see. A 750 million loss in people is offset by 60 million overseas chinese returning. That equals 690 million less people by 2100.

1.5 billion minus 690 million equals 810 million. In others words, China is losing a fuck ton of people and there's no fixing it.

Perhaps when the adults are talking you best sit out.

By the way Japan's population, despite returning diaspora, is shrinking to the point where entire towns, communities, schools and facilities have closed down. Particularly in rural areas.

You couldn't be more more wrong if you wanted to be.

I'm fed up of your insults.

It wouldn't matter what I have to say you're going to find a reason to criticise me for it.

Absolutely fed up to the back teeth of you.

 

[JS96]

 

[Sharkman84]

Honestly, read a book. They're a one party government with a market economy.

Do yourself a favour and look up the definition of 'communism' in the dictionary or check it out on Wikipedia.

Seriously. Pick up a book. China is about as communist as Singapore.

China has private enterprise, large-scale private ownership, billionaires and private corporations, competitive markets in most consumer and industrial sectors and
foreign investment and global trade.

Did you know that the former GDR was not actual democratic? Having 'communist' in the name doesn't make it so. They may have started out like that in the 50s but they're far from that these days.

When was China's last free & fair election?

Even one of their former leaders was assasinated for going against the status quo.

Remember the Chinese-Australian journalist that got gaoled over there?

China not communist? Bloody hell take your medication ffs.

I dare you to go over there and criticise their government and see how far that gets you.

And don't dare fucking sook to Canberra when you get stuck in a Beijing gaol cell.

 

[Muz]

You're right it's in the millions and we're going to see drastic shifts. In saying that, I wonder how many people may change their own circumstances and try to live more off the grid in a sustainable way not relying on the massive economic juggernaut.

I wonder about very small self sustaining towns. I guess the people there get their 80 years, live off the land and passers through and don't need to be too concerned what's happening on Wall Street. It's unfortunate things are all about money and being on the grid. Our system places a value on every single action. Until people stop calculating every single penny of a transaction little will change.

I've just come back from Taiwan. Last year I went to Japan. I'll tell you something for nothing, there's barely any young people anywhere outside major cities.

You might be able to live 'off grid' but roads still need to be fixed, electricity needs to flow, grocery stores need to be supplied, old people need looking after, infrastructure needs maintenance.

If you have 10 open positions for jobs and 6 applicants you're still 4 positions short. And you can increase wages but you're still 4 short if those people change jobs.

Not to mention a massive reduction in taxes as hardly anyone is working. In 4 generations Korea will go from 6 taxpayers supporting the elderly to 1.5. How do you fund anything with hardly anyone working compared to those that need looking after?

Climate change is going to seen like a church picnic compared to the demographic collapse coming.

You and I will be dead but our grandkids are in for a hell of a ride.

 

[Muz]

When was China's last free & fair election?

Even one of their former leaders was assasinated for going against the status quo.

Remember the Chinese-Australian journalist that got gaoled over there?

China not communist? Bloody hell take your medication ffs.

I dare you to go over there and criticise their government and see how far that gets you.

And don't dare fucking sook to Canberra when you get stuck in a Beijing gaol cell.

Does China have a free market economy? Yes or no?

And after you answer yes check the dictionary to see whether that means they're communist or not.

If they have free enterprise, billionaires and a free market, they're by definition, not communist. They may be authoritarian but they're not communist.

 

[JS96]

Honestly, read a book. They're a one party government with a market economy.

Do yourself a favour and look up the definition of 'communism' in the dictionary or check it out on Wikipedia.

Seriously. Pick up a book. China is about as communist as Singapore.

China has private enterprise, large-scale private ownership, billionaires and private corporations, competitive markets in most consumer and industrial sectors and
foreign investment and global trade.

Did you know that the former GDR was not actual democratic? Having 'communist' in the name doesn't make it so. They may have started out like that in the 50s but they're far from that these days.

Have to laugh at places like DDR or North Korea with the word democratic in the name.

You've described China correctly. Basically the Marxist protesters want to abolish private property and slash the throats of the rich while ensuring they have their own wealth a private property. These ideas need to be eradicated. The more moderate types who see the benefits of a balance of state owned and privatised items need to be invited to the discussions. The wealthy won't relinquish it easily.

It's a catch 22. State owned aspects have their own bumbling failures but we can sure as hell find enough examples for ridiculous and dangerously run private enterprise too. If we'd just taxed and controlled the wealth juggernauts properly, we'd be in much better stead.

Examples I need to research would be the Irish invitation of tech companies. While they spawned a whole new industry and economic growth, there are people in those areas who didn't see a cent or got priced out due to property increases.

We're seeing this more and more now that regular working people are being priced out. I liked the comment here once on upon purchasing a second or third home, what else are they going to do besides live in it? I think there's a place to use one extra home for retirement planning or family support and extension but once things start hitting higher numbers it becomes a sick, aggressively geared game.

 

[JS96]

When was China's last free & fair election?

Even one of their former leaders was assasinated for going against the status quo.

Remember the Chinese-Australian journalist that got gaoled over there?

China not communist? Bloody hell take your medication ffs.

I dare you to go over there and criticise their government and see how far that gets you.

And don't dare fucking sook to Canberra when you get stuck in a Beijing gaol cell.

Just thinking out loud. Well, India have even more people but perhaps the CCP control is the only way to keep such a massive population in check. If it were every man for himself you have one billion political parties but perhaps it is a sort if glue needed in China. Certainly not something I'd like to live under but it may make sense there.

 

[Muz]

When was China's last free & fair election?

Even one of their former leaders was assasinated for going against the status quo.

Remember the Chinese-Australian journalist that got gaoled over there?

China not communist? Bloody hell take your medication ffs.

I dare you to go over there and criticise their government and see how far that gets you.

And don't dare fucking sook to Canberra when you get stuck in a Beijing gaol cell.

Lol. Criticise the Israeli government in Australia and there's a good chance you'll get thrown in jail here too.

 

[Sharkman84]

Does China have a free market economy? Yes or no?

And after you answer yes check the dictionary to see whether that means they're communist or not.

If they have free enterprise, billionaires and a free market, they're by definition, not communist. They may be authoritarian but they're not communist.

Looks like Google disagrees with you.

 

[Muz]

Just thinking out loud. Well, India have even more people but perhaps the CCP control is the only way to keep such a massive population in check. If it were every man for himself you have one billion political parties but perhaps it is a sort if glue needed in China. Certainly not something I'd like to live under but it may make sense there.

Look at Singapore. A one party government since their independence. They're smashing it.

There are benefits. No pesky opposition to get in the way of government policy.

No roadblocks, get what you want done, bulldoze your vision through.

Basically a benevolent dictatorship. Food for thought

 

[Sharkman84]

Lol. Criticise the Israeli government in Australia and there's a good chance you'll get thrown in jail here too.

I'm not going to get stuck in that conversation again so I'll leave that one alone.

 

[JS96]

I've just come back from Taiwan. Last year I went to Japan. I'll tell you something for nothing, there's barely any young people anywhere outside major cities.

You might be able to live 'off grid' but roads still need to be fixed, electricity needs to flow, grocery stores need to be supplied, old people need looking after, infrastructure needs maintenance.

If you have 10 open positions for jobs and 6 applicants you're still 4 positions short. And you can increase wages but you're still 4 short if those people change jobs.

Not to mention a massive reduction in taxes as hardly anyone is working. In 4 generations Korea will go from 6 taxpayers supporting the elderly to 1.5. How do you fund anything with hardly anyone working compared to those that need looking after?

Climate change is going to seen like a church picnic compared to the demographic collapse coming.

You and I will be dead but our grandkids are in for a hell of a ride.

Very true points. The population to fund it all shrinks and there are more takers than contributors.

It's about the bulge in population, isn't it? People argue places had smaller populations before but they young outnumbered the old. We're already seeing a spread with older people working longer. Young people need to train and study. Something some countries need is to get them trained and skilled as early as possible to get them working. If we think about the skills that could be acquired by air pilots in WW2 at 19 years old, surely we can take a war footing towards these areas to stem the tide, however small.

Economically speaking though it sucks for certain industries. You've got young Germans learning to be a baker and their pay can go up due to the scarcity. What does the government do, fund a program to bring Indonesians in to learn the trade and keep wages down. The same goes for nursing care. The local staff are fighting for better wages only for the next dump of imports to keep them down. No wonder they're pissed. The government certainly would need to step in and introduce an award wage system but industry lobby and economic shakiness seems to prevent it. These workers are not net contributors anymore as their deductions fund a broken system and they have very little disposable income anymore.

 

[Sharkman84]

Look at Singapore. A one party government since their independence. They're smashing it.

There are benefits. No pesky opposition to get in the way of government policy.

No roadblocks, get what you want done, bulldoze your vision through.

Basically a benevolent dictatorship. Food for thought

Singapore has free elections, they had one last year.

 

[Muz]

Looks like Google disagrees with you.

China has the second most billionaires in the world. Not bad for a 'communist' country.

 

[JS96]

Look at Singapore. A one party government since their independence. They're smashing it.

There are benefits. No pesky opposition to get in the way of government policy.

No roadblocks, get what you want done, bulldoze your vision through.

Basically a benevolent dictatorship. Food for thought

Singapore have made excellent moves. The difference to other states with a single party is they don't rule their people with an iron fist. They've used geographic location excellently, invested heavily in technology and education so the people trust the government will work on ever improving things. I'd be interested to know if any opposition to the state really exists there.

 

[Muz]

Singapore has free elections, they had one last year.

'Free' in inverted commas. They've never had a change of government since their independence. Out of their 99 seat Parliament there's 10 opposition members. 2 are state mandated.

The rank coercion the government engages in when elections are on would blow your mind.

 

[JS96]

All these big companies and economic models seeing people laid off. Who do they expect to sell to eventually? There is something of an elaborate self service network amongst banks, insurance and other service companies. They've set the game up for themselves.

Saw a funny comment the other day. Most business consulting projects could be solved internally by having the staff themselves attend a brainstorming meeting.

 

[Muz]

Singapore have made excellent moves. The difference to other states with a single party is they don't rule their people with an iron fist. They've used geographic location excellently, invested heavily in technology and education so the people trust the government will work on ever improving things. I'd be interested to know if any opposition to the state really exists there.

China has basically followed Singapore's lead.

Like you said their people accept a reduction in government criticism and rights because they 'trust' the government to do the right thing by them.

In answer to your question about Singapore I lived there for 3 years a while back. There is no opposition. It's 'opposition' in name only. Basically, window dressing.

But it works for them.

 

[Muz]

I'm fed up of your insults.

It wouldn't matter what I have to say you're going to find a reason to criticise me for it.

Absolutely fed up to the back teeth of you.

It's not my fault you can't math. You said 60 million people returning would solve a 750 million person deficit.

60 million won't put a dent in it.

 

[WhatAmIWatching]

Every economy is based on endless population growth. That's a fact.

Without immigration Australia would be shrinking as well. In fact the idiots who decry immigration don't realise that without it the Australian economy would collapse.

Societies, like Japan, Korea, China that don't allow immigrants are in a hell of a mess down the track.

For example. 100 people now in south Korea will turn into 13 people within 4 generations. They, with others, are in a death spiral.

The bigger, more overarching problem, is given all of the world's economies are based on endless growth how can they adapt when there are no immigrants to attract. Which will happen.

The trend all over the world, particularly the western world, is below replacement fertility. There are massive problems ahead. Massive.

I did say adapt.

And yes current economic policy is based on increasing population and consumerism. I'm old enough to have experienced the change from savings to mass consumerism. That happened in the 80s when the USA went from having surplus savings (public & private) to both being in deficit. Australia has always had a savings deficit but thanks to compulsory superannuation that deficit has shrunk enormously.

Your view is rather pessimistic. And a serious question, is your world view based on keeping the economics as they are or is it to keep society from being in perpetual conflict & misery?