Comments by "Aristocles Athenaioi" (@aristoclesathenaioi4939) on "Lei's Real Talk" channel.

  1. 119
  2. 35
  3. 34
  4. I apologize in advance for what will be a long reply, but it takes some effortvto explain the situation with rare earth production. Rare earths can be extracted from coal tailings, and one company that manufactures solar panels already extracts cadmium from coal mine tailings. The journal articles linked below describe procedures for extraction of rare Earth's from coal byproducts. These methods likely cost more than rare earths from China do now. However, avoiding the ecological damage by the rare earth mining could prove a marketing advantage to manufacturers outside of China. Market research has indicated that consumers in the US will pay a premium price for products made with green technologies. Companies could present the process of extracting rate earths from toxic coal mine byproduct as a green technology because it helps dispose of coal mine byproducts. If China blocked the sales of rare Earth's to manufacturers outside China that could make it even more attractive to extract rare earths for coal byproducts. When you consider that Germany developed ballistic missiles because the Versailles Treaty forbid Germany from having long range artillery, you realize how inventive people can side-step sanctions by developing substitute technologies. Technology sanctions often have unintended consequences that result in the sanctions back firing. Both the US and China should weigh technology sanctions very carefully. A Review of the Occurrence and Promising Recovery Methods of Rare Earth Elements from Coal and Coal By-Products: International Journal of Coal Preparation and Utilization: Vol 35, No 6 (tandfonline.com) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19392699.2015.1033097 Can Harvesting Rare Earth Elements Solve the Coal Ash Crisis? Over 3 billion tons of coal ash occupy more than 1,400 sites across the US https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2021-2-march-april/feature/can-harvesting-rare-earth-elements-solve-coal-ash-crisis Citric acid can be used to extract rare earth metals from coal ash - MINING.COM https://www.mining.com/food-grade-solvent-can-be-used-to-extract-rare-earth-metals-from-coal-ash/
    34
  5. Another excellent explanation of the politics in China. This reminds me of the corruption in the British Navy at the time of the American War of Independence, which left the British Navy ineffective against France who allied with the colonialists. If I may be indulged a long description: In 1783, when attention was called to abuses in the public offices, Mr. Pitt stated in the House of Commons that though it bad been officially declared that no fees were received by the navy office, it appeared that very considerable sums were received by the officers under the name of 'gifts'. Exact inquiry disclosed wholesale robbery rather than peculation. The accounts showed a deficit of about three hundred thousand pounds of bread in 1780, besides beef, pork, and other provisions. It was shown that the contract price of bread was more than 4s. per cwt. above the market price, and that the bread actually supplied was 4s. per cwt. inferior to the contract ; that the men in charge of the storehouses kept hogs in them, and fed them on serviceable biscuit ; that stores of different kinds and in large quantities had been taken out of the yards not for the private use of the officers, but for sale, and that everywhere intimidation or guilty complicity had kept the knowledge of these abominations secret (Parliamentary Report, 1783-4). The dockyards had been sinks of iniquity before that time, and were so after it [cf. Jervis, John, Earl of St. Vincent], but at no time were they so utterly bad as during the war of American independence. This state of affairs took place when the First Earl of Sandwich was the Lord of the Admiralty. It was said of the Earl of Sandwich that he was "too infamous to have a friend, too bad for bad men to commend." History does so often repeat itself.
    34
  6. 27
  7. 26
  8. 22
  9. 21
  10. 18
  11. 17
  12. 17
  13. 17
  14. 15
  15. 15
  16. 12
  17. If the CCP wants to take TSMC then they need to do VERY quick strike because it is very easy to destroy a semiconductor fabrication facility. You only need to open the clean rooms and you will have a herculean task of cleaning them out again. Also, the real valuable asset in a semiconductor facility are the human assets. I would be willing to bet that Taiwan with the US has a plan to evacuate all the people critical technical know-how. I am sure that a lot of people working at TSMC would willingly work for the CPP, but it will take years to restart the fab facilities, and during that time TSMC could restart in the new facilities they are building in the US. Also, the ASML systems at TSMC would likely be sabotaged if a take-over of the TSMC looked likely. Although ASML is a Dutch company, it relies on US intellectual property and patents. The US already has an embargo on selling the latest ASML technology to China. Any semiconductor company cut-off from ASML will have an impossible time getting the smallest and highest density chips fabricated. The world-wide manufacturing disruption caused by a disruption in the chips from TSMC would be cause alone for a serious backlash at China. Having said all this, I doubt it would deter China from attempting an invasion of Taiwan because such an attack would be motivated by political issues divorced from the issues of restarting TSMC operations. I seriously doubt that Chinese strategist shown in this video has even the slightest technical knowledge to understand how economicaly disastrous the consequences of disrupting TSMC operations would be or what an immense challenge it would be to restore those operations.
    11
  18. 8
  19. 7
  20. 6
  21. 6
  22. 6
  23. 6
  24. I have a friend who fled Crimea two years with her 5 yr old son who is now 7 yrs old. She speaks Russian but considers herself Ukrainian. Her mother and sister decided to stay in Crimea, and they had tried to convince her to return. She wants a better life for her son in Ukraine than she feels he would gets in Russia. Although she knew nobody in the city where she moved she did find a man who loves her and who she loves and who loves her son who calls him "Daddy" Her husband fought in the Donbass where he drove an armored vehicle. When the Russians invaded, my friend insisted on staying in Ukraine because she would be near husband eventhough he has gone back into the Army. I tried to persuade her to leave because I felt that her husband would feel better knowing she and her son were safe in Poland. She refused to leave. When the Russians shelled the nuclear power plant then her husband told she had to leave because it was too dangerous. I and some other friends of hers here in the US helped her with money to get to Poland with her son. She is now in Poland but will probably have to move on in about a month. I have told her to go to Berlin because she also has her son's dog with them, and the Germans are very dog friendly. From Berlin she could get a visa to Canada where there is a large Ukrainian immigrant community. I grew up in the US in that same area, but I no longer live there. Once again, she refuses to go to Berlin because it takes her farther from her husband. First she is refugee from Crimea, then a refugee from Western Ukraine moving West to Poland all because Russia has invaded her country. She has had to flee twice, and her husband fought against the Russians first in the Donbass and now back into the Territorial Defense. I can deeply empathize with the Chinese man who has a Ukrainian wife and wanted to keep his family together. Meanwhile the nationalists in China mock him on the Internet. He wants to keep his family together, my friend wants to keep her family together, but what do those supporters of the CCP want? I have no idea.
    5
  25. 5
  26. 5
  27. 5
  28. 5
  29. It seems to me that China is basically buying A320 airplanes from itself given that they manufacture A320 themselves. Essentially China is subsidizing their own airline industry. I should also note that the US Government effectively subsidizes Boeing given that Boeing has numerous military contracts with the US Department of Defense. In the 21st century a country needs a robust aircraft industry just as a country needed a blue water Navy in the 19th century. Aside from the obvious military advantages of a robust aircraft industry are the less obvious military logistical values. As General Omar Bradley famously said: “Amateurs talk strategy. Professionals talk logistics.” Looking at the heavy lift capabilities the US has used to supply the weapons to Ukraine demonstrates the importance of air cargo. None of the other NATO countries except Canada have needed to use air transport to deliver weapons to supply Ukraine. Whenever one sees a Boeing passenger plane or cargo plane, one should keep in mind those planes can carry troops and weapons in time of war. The CCP knows this very well and wants to make sure that they have the logistical capabilities needed to sustain an invasion of Taiwan. Looking back at the East Timor Crisis from 1999 to 2000 helps to frame the importance of logistical capabilities. The International Force for East Timor (INTERFET) from the United Nations and led by Australia was refused US ground troops but was able to secure vital support for airlift, logistics, specialised intelligence, over the horizon deterrence, and "diplomatic muscle". This sounds a lot like the situation in Ukraine today where the US refuses to commit troops but provides other capabilities. A war with China would require far more resources on both sides of such a conflict. Reading the Wikipedia article on the International Force East Timor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Force_East_Timor helps to remind us of earlier conflicts like the current Russo-Ukrainian War when multiple nations needed to cooperate to stop a genocide. This comment has strayed from the initial topic of the CCP buying A320 jets. However, we should never forget conflicts like East Timor and the human pain and suffering inflicted on the Timorese as well as the fierce fighting to end the oppression in East Timor.
    5
  30. 5
  31. 4
  32. Ironically, the Soviet Union had a more stable political structure than both Russia and China have now. The KGB was essential for the political stability of the Soviet Union. People may forget that the KGB was also referred to as "the shield of the Party." If you wonder who the Party needed a shield against, then the answer is the Army. The KGB, unlike the present Russian FSS, actually had armed troops that had a separate chain of command from the Army. I always found it interesting that the Soviet Union had a tripartite system of Government which corresponded to the tripartite form of Government in the US, as follows: Legislative Branch: -- US: Congress. -- Soviet Union: Communist Party. Executive Branch: -- US President, Commander and Chief of the Armed Forces, and effectively the Head of the Police. This is more obvious in the Government of a State within the United States, where the State Police report to the Governor. It is also worth remembering that the US President commands the National Guard in each State. -- Soviet Union: Marshal of the Soviet Union. This was the position held by Gyorgy Zhukov. The last Marshal of the Soviet Union was Dmitry Yazov, appointed in 1990, who was imprisoned after the failed coup against Mikhail Gorbachev in 1991. This is exactly what the KGB was expected to defend against. Judicial Branch: Now here is where it gets really interesting. -- US: Federal and State Courts. -- Soviet Union: KGB. Now at this point, you may be asking "why is the KGB the organization corresponding to the Judiciary?" The answer is that the Judiciary and the Courts are in place to protect against the Executive Branch (the Military and the Police) trying to act in contravention of the Laws passed by Congress. You may also ask yourself, "The KGB had agents through-out the Soviet Union. If the KGB corresponds to the Judicial Branch, then who corresponds to KGB agents in the US?" The answer is simple, "Lawyers." Every lawyer in the United States is an officer of the Court. This is why the first move of an autocrat after becoming the head of the Executive Branch immediately tries to weaken the Courts because that effectively removes the Rule of Law. You only need to look at Hungary and Turkiye to see that at work in contemporary times. There are many more examples, I simply cite those two because they are part of NATO, and in Hungary's case, Part of the EU as well. Putin long ago neutered Russia's Court System which now hands down whatever sentence Putin wants, and under whatever law Putin uses as a pretext. On paper at least, the head of the Dumas is the Prime Minister as opposed to Putin. As President of Russia, Putin is supposed to be Commander in Chief of the Russian Armed Forces. However, the legal head of the Russian Armed Forces is Shoigu, and that is why Putin makes sure that Shoigu, who has served Putin from Putin's time as Mayor of St. Petersburg and Shoigu never served in the military and therefore lacks any power base in the Russian Armed Forces. It also explains why Generals come and go, even Gerasimov, but Shoigu always remains. Although the FSS is technically separate from the Russian Armed Forces, the FSS and the Armed Forces work hand in glove. Gorkin was an FSS Colonel as opposed to an Army Colonel. In truth, the FSS, unlike its predecessor the KGB, lacks its own armed troops comparable to those of the KGB. In place of KGB troops as the Shield of Party against the Armed Forces, Putin needs a "Praetorian Guard" to protect him from the Russian Armed Forces. Does Xi Jinping have a "Praetorian Guard" similar to Putin's? Historically though, a Praetorian Guard has taken control by appointing their own Emperor as happened when the Praetorian Guard declared Claudius following the assassination of the Roman Emperor Caligula by the Praetorian Guard. The Captain of the Praetorian Guard and the other Guard members who assassinated Caligula did commit suicide at the command of the new Emperor Claudius because they had betrayed their oath to protect the Emperor.  They had enough concern for their honor that they did commit suicide to restore their honor and to display remorse for breaking their oath.  Somehow, I doubt that Putin's personal Guards unit or whoever Xi Jinping has as a personal Guards unit would act similarly.
    4
  33. 4
  34. 4
  35. 4
  36. 3
  37. 3
  38. 3
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41. 3
  42. 3
  43. 3
  44. 3
  45. I must agree with the comments that take exception to your view of how benign Putin is for Ukraine. In the July speech from Putin that you quoted, Putin presented the Ukraine Russia shared culture and border as comparable to the relationship of Canada to the US, or Austria to Germany. In fact that is a false equivalence. Despite having history in common, Ukrainian and Russian are different though related languages. I have a friend in Ukraine who who grew up and lived in Crimea, but fled Crimea with her son when the Russians annexed it. She settled in Lviv in Western Ukraine, which about as far West as you can go in Ukraine. She and her son only spoke Russian, and now she is learning to speak Ukrainian. There is less difference between Ukrainian and Russian than there is between Cantonese and Mandarin. However, there is a lot more difference between Ukrainian and Russian than between English as spoken in Canada and English as spoken in the US. The US and Canada really do speak the same language. I should add the my friend in Ukraine views Russia with the same apprehension that my Taiwanese friends view the PRC. The real issue in both Ukraine and Taiwan is whether they can continue to develop as separate and democratic societies, or will they become subject to an autocratic regime even if they share common history, culture and speak closely related languages. Ukraine should be permitted to decide it's destiny, and Taiwan permitted to decide it's destiny. Neither should have that decision made for them.
    3
  46. 2
  47. 2
  48. 2
  49.  @MrAdhiSuryana  Absolutely correct. That is consistent with the point about companies taking on debt. Needing to take on debt to continue or expand operations, some companies must turn to sources of debt that hurt the company. The fact that companies need to take on debt never implied that they made good choices about where they got the money, and who lent the money. Loan sharks exist because companies need loans, but reputable institutions refuse to lend money to the company because the bank judges the company's ability as poor. Enter stock rating systems like Standard & Poors, who provide the ratings on which banks rely to make decisions about whether a company can service the debt and the bank will get a return on their loan. Stock rating companies make mistakes, but their purpose is clear. A common practice these days is for companies to buy back shares to increase the value of the shares in the market, but the real purpose is to assure compensation for executives whose income depends on stock options and therefore depend in the growth of the value of the company stock. Companies who do this really are not buying back shares because the company believes it will earn more by investing in itself. Stock buy-backs should be used to invest in the income generators, such as new manufacturing facilities, rather than to assure to assure that stock options in the company have value. If the company does depend on retaining specific employee expertise, as some service companies such as consulting companies do them stock buy backs to increase employee compensation and thus retain those employees is a case of investing of the company investing in itself to continue company growth. It may also be a way to launder money through the company as you so rightly indicated in your comment.
    2
  50. 2