Comments by "GuyWhoLikesTheSnarkies14" (@guywholikesthesnarkies1435) on "Hakim" channel.

  1. 556
  2. 181
  3. 165
  4. 145
  5. 103
  6. 94
  7. 82
  8. 78
  9. 76
  10. 72
  11. 56
  12.  @selaangel6225  Socialism isn't a fixed definition, it doesn't mean perfection or some romanticized idea of a supposed persistent model of governance and guiding ideas/principles that allows a country to steadily develop itself into a better version of itself. Ppl should stop romanticizing the Soviet model too much because it's far from perfect either. China, for all of its ups-and-downs and imperfection, will always be a socialist country no matter what. Being in the primary stage of development means you have to embrace mistakes, flaws and errors. Like I said in my previous argument, China doesn't "mix up" socialism and capitalism. It's still in the primary stage of socialist development and thus, *hasn't* progressed and moved away completely or substantially from capitalist mode of production just yet. And since it's embracing the scientific path of socialist development, on the basis of Lenin's NEP model that's being continued upon and gradually developed and adapted to the ever-changing material condition throughout times, the result is inevitably slow and gradual. Also, I don't agree w. your assertion on China which seems to be based on skewed, distorted and misrepresented information of the country. "After the pandemic, China's economy has hit the bust" This is just an utter bs and I don't think you really understand the ramification of the things that you just said there. We're assuming a scenario that's gonna have an implication on serious domino effect and impacts to the surrounding regional economy (speaking as a resident from SEA myself) and ultimately, the rest of the world. So you better cross check your information again and don't conflate economic contraction in the past few years to a major crisis. I'm not even going into detail w. worker condition because this is such a grey area where information could easily be distorted and/or misrepresented. All I'm gonna say is there's *no* such thing as a "996" work culture except that it's a deliberate media exaggeration/manipulation to the real situation on the ground. Working condition in China's continually improving but nothing in this world is perfect. There'll always be oversights and loopholes to be exploited by corporate elements on every moment from now, then and to come. Also, this whole "996" mostly refers to the controversial remark made by Jack Ma, which somehow linked to a series of separate incidents of workers in *service sectors* who died from crunch. This had long been addressed and solved, and resulted in a government push to reduce work hours for service job workers. Only the most ardent anti-China libs or online "Maoist" would be so hellbent to bring this up to the news. And as for the concern over the supposed increase in "unemployment" (but primarily among the youths), it's not what you and many ppl think it is because y'all miss the key important contexts. First of all, China's currently transforming its economy from developing into a developed one. Means that China's raising its supply chain standard to the higher level based on cutting edge IoT management and advanced hi-tech manufacturing. Therefore it's seeing change in working dynamics where manufacturing's becoming more streamlined and efficient alongside increase in IT-based/oriented job. What's happening in China's overabundance of productive force that doesn't keep quiet in pace w. the rapid development of advance manufacturing, particularly in the developed metro regions of Chinese, leading to some layoffs of workers in several cases. Wrt this issue, the Chinese govt. has been actively working to address this issue through several policy measures. Among them is the mobilization of productive forces to work on the auxiliary manufacturing & service sectors scattered throughout the smaller cities & town across the rural side of China. But this requires many workers to be retrained and reoriented for the new job environment, resulting in a slow process. And secondly, the supposed "high unemployment" figure only refers to a specific phenomenon among the Chinese youth demographic, which is about +20% of total Chinese youths *eligible for works* between age 18-29. Means that these +20% could be "unemployed" for various reasons incl. required to take post-grad study at their university respectively. Moreover, anybody insisted that China has always been loomed w. "unemployment problems" better have a good explanation over some randomly picked small remote modern town in China and how come it's getting well-built and populated in the first place https://youtu.be/eUN2nEN5KuQ All in all, there's simply no denying that China is still and will always be a socialist country. Its contribution and positive impacts to the global economy and geopolitics is nonetheless a significant one.
    43
  13. 35
  14. 34
  15. 31
  16. 31
  17. 29
  18. 29
  19. 27
  20. 25
  21. 22
  22. 21
  23. This is why China's BRI is a league apart of Western extractive multinational corporation deal through IMF leverage. Sure, China's enterprises coming over to open business, for example in Africa, might be perceived to bear some neocolonial subtext. But here's the major differences with Western scheme: China also come to help Africa, Sub-Saharan countries in this particular, to develop their crucial infrastructures e.g. transportation, industry, healthcare, education etc etc. all things necessary to support their economy and material development. On top of that, Chinese loan terms tend to be much favorable with not only extended repayment due date but also moratorium and additionally, Chinese BRI also includes a debt restructuring program where China would help writing off debts possessed by these countries, usually owed to the Western financial companies incl. IMF debts. All these without additional strings attached. Even when these countries are supposedly getting indebted toward China in turn, but another reality behind this is that Chinese firms often have the tendency to delay/intentionally refuse to ask for repayment from the debtors, despite overtime. This is only possible because of China's pure intent to cooperate with these countries through a B2B scheme and therefore, these BRI projects are more being seen as a form of long-term investment and China has no reason to immediately demand return of profit unless it has created the desired growth and development effects. Edit: added missing context. Also, I kept fixing some grammatical errors. English isn't my 1st language😅
    16
  24. 13
  25. 12
  26. 12
  27. 11
  28. 11
  29. 10
  30. 10
  31. 9
  32. 9
  33. 8
  34. 7
  35. 7
  36. 7
  37. 7
  38. 6
  39. 6
  40. 6
  41. 6
  42. 6
  43. 6
  44. 5
  45. 5
  46. 5
  47. 5
  48. 4
  49. 4
  50. 4