Comments by "Peter Jacobsen" (@pjacobsen1000) on "Bloomberg Television"
channel.
-
41
-
34
-
25
-
20
-
17
-
14
-
12
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
China's central government debt is now at $16 trillion, plus local government debt at $12 trillion, totaling $28 trillion. This does not include the debt held by State Owned Enterprises, which lies at around $11 trillion. If we include that, we end up at $39 trillion. However, China has the benefit of being a centrally controlled financial system, so debt can be cancelled, or money can be moved around, or be issued, for a long, long time. It's not good, but it's not a disaster, either.
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@canto_v12 I don't know about 'most countries', but in most western and other developed countries, hate speech tends to be free speech. It is a common misunderstanding that 'hate speech' is punished by law in the west. Hate speech is generally considered protected speech.
It is true that there a limitations in speech, the question is how broad these limitations are. For example, it may seem reasonable to limit 'incitement to violence', but only if the term 'incitement' is very clearly defined with clear limits. To say "I hope xyz-organisation is overthrown" is perfectly legal in democratic countries.
Anyway, let's go back to HK. Before 1997, HK was perhaps the most free region in all of Asia when it came to speech. You could critique and protest against colonial British rule, against the governor, against the police, against the government of Britain or HK. These activities were all protected. People did not need prior permission to march in the streets, though there were rules against stopping or disrupting traffic or normal business.
The National Security Law makes it a crime to 'incite hatred against the Central Government or the HK government'. There has never been such a law in HK before, and such a law does not exist in any democratic/western/developed country. But laws like this are common in authoritarian countries.
You like this law, and you have to live with it. Good luck.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Moore88745 Fair point, but she lived through the Korean War, the Moon landing, the Cold War, the Cuban missile crisis, the Biafra Civil War and famine, the Vietnam War, the Chinese Cultural Revolution and later Reform and Opening, the Hip Hop 'revolution', the crack epidemic and urban blight, the Ethiopian famine and Live Aid in the 80s, The end of the Soviet Union, the fall of the Berlin Wall. Maybe she just forgot about all those events.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DccAnh "the lack of western tourist affect no one." That's true in economic terms, and this has been the case since domestic tourism really took off in 1999.
However, the question is what other effects the meeting of different cultures have. Sure, you can choose to be isolationist, and China has done this many times in history, but it always seems to end badly. Tang Dynasty was open, Song Dynasty closed down. Ming started more open, but quickly closed down, Qing started closed, then was forced open by foreign countries, then China closed down in 1949, before opening again in 1978. We all know the effects.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@canto_v12 I'm just going to quote the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union):
Do I need a permit?
-You don’t need a permit to march in the streets or on sidewalks, as long as marchers don’t obstruct car or pedestrian traffic. If you don’t have a permit, police officers can ask you to move to the side of a street or sidewalk to let others pass or for safety reasons.
-Certain types of events may require permits. These include a march or parade that requires blocking traffic or street closure; a large rally requiring the use of sound amplifying devices; or a rally over a certain size at most parks or plazas.
While certain permit procedures require submitting an application well in advance of the planned event, police can’t use those procedures to prevent a protest in response to breaking news events.
-Restrictions on the route of a march or sound equipment might violate the First Amendment if they are unnecessary for traffic control or public safety, or if they interfere significantly with effective communication to the intended audience.
-A permit cannot be denied because the event is controversial or will express unpopular views.
You live in the US where you enjoy all sorts of freedoms, but you are quite happy to deny those same freedoms to the people of HK, just because it 'seems necessary' to you from afar. HK worked very well with these freedoms, and now they're being strangled, newspapers closed, people imprisoned, just for speaking their mind.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ZweiZwolf But you will agree that after 1978, China started a massive economic liberalization and let private citizens start their own businesses, which led to the greatest wealth increase in China's history.
The entire hospitality industry is mostly private, social media and tech is mostly private, retail is mostly private, real estate is (or has been) mostly private, agriculture is partly private, with some state owned farms in the 中原, 西北 and 东北 regions. Light industry, incl. electronics, bicycles, electric bikes is mostly private, textiles, apparel and shoe industry is mostly private, tourism is partly private.
Chinese socialism was tried from 1949-1978. You tell me if you think that was successful, or even better, ask your grandparents.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sleepymeow7156 My point is that your system is no better at choosing leaders than a democratic system, which is what you claim. You claim that the Chinese system is meritocracy-based, because that is what the govt. tells you with online campaigns and little, cute cartoons. But it isn't. It is based in traditional Chinese culture where you rise by making connections to other powerful people, grant the right favors and give gifts to others to 'make friends', join the right organizations, say the right words as told to you by the Center and 'The Core of The Center'.
Your political, economic and social ideas are irrelevant, because you never let them become known in public until you reach the top, so no one can know what your vision is before it's too late.
Now, I have no doubt that you agree with whatever your leaders say, having no real opinion of your own, other than what you're being told.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1