Comments by "Bob" (@bobs_toys) on "PolyMatter" channel.

  1. With a little introspection, you could ask yourself why scapegoating China worked very well politically. But I doubt that's coming.
    1
  2. Yes, but the level depends if you're a party member or not. If you're a party member it's quite decent. If you're not.... It's not. Even at this level, the fund isn't expected to last beyond the mid 30's.
    1
  3. For that to have a realistic effect, HK would need to have the world's highest birthrate. You'd need something that basically put the per capita birth rate at 1 baby for every two Hong Kongers every year. Even that would only cover a couple of years of the shortfall.
    1
  4. @Tulak Hord that's one for two people in total. This would need to be an annual thing.
    1
  5. @Tulak Hord Tracey is saying it's not that has because of people going to Hong Kong. To bring births back to the 2016 level, Hong Kong would need to have four million births per year. It's simply how the numbers of a city of 7 million on paper making up the shortfall of a country of 1.4 billion would look. Also, two children has been legal for five years.
    1
  6. And cultural changes, to accept this sudden multiculturalism. And massive increases in money to compete with what western countries can offer. And probably some magic, because immigration to make up the shortfall is a lot more difficult for a country of 1.4 billion.
    1
  7. Only with some combination of a much, much higher gdp per capita and a much lower population.
    1
  8. Mao killed many, many more people during three years of peace than the Japanese did during 16 years of war. (Or Hitler did during seven years of it) How efficient do you need? They're beating German and Japanese efficiency hands down
    1
  9. As opposed to the entire lot up front.
    1
  10.  @prst99  absolutely. I can't see anything unreasonable about it.
    1
  11. China will definitely be a region in the future. Maybe not a country, but definitely a region.
    1
  12.  @yume6532  we've heard that one before. A very similar political party said its own country was starting a thousand year Reich
    1
  13.  @yume6532  the people who proclaimed the thousand year Reich said similar
    1
  14.  @yume6532  if you say so.
    1
  15.  Emma Burner  not that massive, they don't. And their cultures are pretty different to the PRC culture. Even the Hong Kong culture is very different. Let alone more distant lands. As far as being worse goes... Only when comparing very specific parts of the PRC that are only lived in by a few percent of the population. Also, take it from someone who's seen these people, they like to be able to send money home. It's their whole reason for moving China... Does not make it easy.... I don't think you read anything past the first sentence when you replied.
    1
  16.  @unifieddynasty  >>South China Sea has always been like this. Petty posturing by all claimants, drowned out by overwhelmingly positive diplomacy and trade relationships multilaterally in the region.<< You think the surrounding countries are happy with the theft of their legal EEZs? >>Hong Kong's protest started out peacefully and the criminal bill was withdrawn.<< The extradition bill was never withdrawn. That statement is a simple lie. Lam declared it 'dead' (a meaningless term) but refused to actually withdraw it. >>Secessionists and foreign agents were everywhere<< Foreign agents weren't needed. Lam's refusal to withdraw the bill plus the mockery she made of peaceful protests was all that was needed. >>Despite this, the PLA was never involved, and zero people died from any police action. That is the context of the National Security legislation. It was clearly the anti-China western sphere that incited these actions, and the reverse would never be tolerated by the west.<< Again, foreign influence wasn't needed. I was there from start to finish. It was purely the govt making a manageable situation worse. >>The global pandemic is overwhelmingly not the fault of China. You can blame China for being authoritarian and secretive for the first two weeks, but then they got their shit together. << Too little, too late. This was something that could only be properly contained before it spread. My own country had gone to zero multiple times, but because it was global, it kept coming back. Kind of like it's continually returning to the PRC. I never did find out where it was contained to, though. There was lots of self congratulation from the CCP about how well they'd contained i. Long story short: It's a global issue today because the CCP lied, covered it up and allowed it to spread. Another manageable situation made worse by the incompetents running the PRC.
    1
  17.  @unifieddynasty  >>Don't strawman. It reflects poorly on you. I specifically stated, quote: 'South China Sea has always been like this. Petty posturing by all claimants, drowned out by overwhelmingly positive diplomacy and trade relationships multilaterally in the region.' You are incapable of rebutting this fact.<< That doesn't answer my questions. >>Literally quoting Wikipedia, which is by far edited by anti-China users: "On 15 June, Lam announced she would 'suspend' the proposed bill.[6] Ongoing protests called for a complete withdrawal of the bill and subsequently the implementation of universal suffrage, which is promised in the Basic Law. On 4 September, after 13 weeks of protests, Lam officially promised to withdraw the bill upon the resumption of the legislative session from its summer recess.[7][8] On 23 October, Secretary for Security John Lee announced the government's formal withdrawal of the bill.[9][10]". << 'Suspend' meant nothing. The promise meant nothing And the 23rd of October was after six months of this. The protests stopped being peaceful long before the bill was wirthdrawn. >>So what is it called when you accuse someone else of lying but you yourself are the liar?<< Ah, so you didn't intend to make it appear as if the bill was withdrawn before the protests became violent? Silly me ;-) >>Your opinion doesn't change the fact that foreign agents were heavily involved in said protests and riots. This, by the way, includes Steve Bannon, among many other Trumpist agents, who famously instigated yet another riot somewhere else in the world. Care to guess where?<< It doesn't change that this was claimed. Frankly, foreign support wasn't needed. People there were furious. >>I don't give a damn about the CCP or Lam's government. I am simply stating the fact that your protests and riots were heavily influenced and funded by foreign agents, which I will remind you yet again would NEVER be tolerated by anti-China western countries. If you are incapable of refuting this fact, then I suggest you move on and stop belabouring worthless opinions.<< You're stating a belief that's been spread by a party that's generally incapable of taking ownership of its mistakers. >>You have a nasty habit of running away from my actual stated points. I reiterate, quote: 'The global pandemic is overwhelmingly not the fault of China. You can blame China for being authoritarian and secretive for the first two weeks, but then they got their shit together. Your country probably didn't get its shit together for two months despite plenty of forewarning from scientists and the WHO and even China itself once they got their shit together. How about you take some personal responsibility instead of blaming China? Also, the Pivot to Asia started in the early 2010s, a full decade before this pandemic. Your gishgallop here is worthless.' You have said nothing to refute any of my points. Try harder.<< What part of my response is that meant to change? The CCP's actrions were too little too late. Then it became global (not just my country. Global) Then it was really out of control. >>Wrong and utterly misleading. Comprehend that there are different levels of government. The Wuhan municipal government didn't take it seriously for two weeks. Then the national government took control and locked down 60 million people in the span of mere days. The people who downplayed the severity were duly and lawfully punished and stripped of their positions. The same cannot be said for the numerous fools and bogans running your various levels of government who didn't bother to properly respond after seeing with their own eyes China's "draconic" lockdowns, after China's leadership repeatedly told the world to take it seriously, after the WHO declared it a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, which explicitly urges all countries to prepare to contain the outbreak, and even after *months and months and years*, so many of your anti-science politicians in power still don't take it seriously. Stop being a coward.. Accept responsibility for your own failures, which are abysmally magnitudinous in comparison to China's delay of just two weeks.<< These weren't CCP officials working within the system the CCP enthusiastically created? Also, from the looks of things, that wasn't a delay of two weeks.
    1
  18.  @unifieddynasty  asking about the opinions of the other countries in response to the CCP's theft of the South China sea (not just their claims as it has been. Actual actions taken) is a straw man? How so?
    1
  19.  @unifieddynasty  ​ >>They promised to suspend the bill. They promised to withdraw the bill. They suspended the bill. They withdrew the bill. They kept their promises and you are a liar for claiming that the bill is not withdrawn.<< My sincerest apologies for not considering the withdrawal (soon to be replaced by the barbaric national security law) after five months of protests and word games I'd read your initial post as you claiming that the bill was withdrawn, then the protests became violent, but I see now that that was nothing more than you attempting to be intentionally misleading. As we see below. >>When I first said "Hong Kong's protest started out peacefully", that was me trying to be charitable towards the peaceful Hong Kong protestors whom I initially supported. In reality, there was always violence during those protests. But since you want to stoop down to deceptive quote-mining, you should acknowledge what I stated in full, quote: 'Hong Kong's protest started out peacefully and the criminal bill was withdrawn. Then the violent rioters continued rioting and even trashed their Legislative building much like the Jan 6th rioters.' Do you understand English? Of course you do. You know exactly what you're doing. You enjoy the underhanded tactic of quote-mining. If you weren't so underhanded, you would not have accused me of claiming that "the bill was withdrawn before the protests became violent".<< So in your chronology: 1. There are peaceful protests. ("Hong Kong's protest started out peacefully") 2. The bill is withdrawn ("and the criminal bill was withdrawn") 3. The protests become violent ("Then the violent rioters continued rioting and even trashed their Legislative building much like the Jan 6th rioters.'") To put dates on these: 1. Was in April 2019 2. Was in October 2019 3. The incident you mentioned was in July 2019. What I'm doing here is going by your words. If your chronology doesn't work as well when dates are applied, that's your problem. Or does the calendar now go April > October > July? >>I reiterate: Your opinion doesn't change the fact that foreign agents were heavily involved in said protests and riots. This, by the way, includes Steve Bannon, among many other Trumpist agents, who famously instigated yet another riot somewhere else in the world. Care to guess where?<< A handshake and a few overseas laws that give moral support is all it takes to put an entire city into six months of mass protest in your books? >>You tried and failed to blame the pandemic on China. I put China's response in proportion to the response of all western countries including yours. You shift the goalposts by saying that China still failed in the first two weeks, even though this is not the primary reason why your country failed. How pathetic.<< The pandemic started in the PRC after CCP officials lied and covered up what was going on. Warnings given after the problem becomes too big to hide don't qualify as doing the right thing. >>Let me remind you that when China locked down 60 million people, Australia only had 4 cases of Covid and America only had 5 cases. China is responsible for those 4 or 5 cases. The tens of thousands to millions more after that are the fault of your government. Your government failed to take the doctors and scientists including The Lancet seriously. Your government failed to take China's lockdown seriously. Your government failed to take China's warnings seriously. Your government failed to take the WHO's Public Health Emergency declaration seriously. Stop being a coward and take responsibility for your own magnitudinous failures<< You have genuine problems understanding that there's a whole world out there, don't you? And that once it's out, it'll keep coming back. This is why there's still lockdowns happening there. Because it keeps coming back. Once upon a time, this virus was in a small, manageable area. At that time, the CCP officials were covering it up and lying through their teeth. >>Are you aware of something called 'corruption'?<< Something that's rife in the PRC that the CCP created. >>How about 'decentralization'?<< Something that's not ride in the PRC the CCP created. >>Are you aware that you are so politically illiterate that you are attempting the equivalent of blaming Mayor Bob Filner's actions on President Barack Obama?<< Is this where we pretend that the governments at all levels aren't CCP appointees? When you're dictator, the buck stops with ytou. >>Wrong. China began full investigations on Jan 18. This is exactly two calendar weeks from the time Covid was first sequenced.<< First sequenced. Not first appeared. (When they knew something was happening and were lying about it) >>Your question is a strawman. You insidiously try to shift the goalposts. You continue to fail to rebut what I actually said.<< How is it a straw man? >>I will reiterate what I actually said again, just for you: 'South China Sea has always been like this. Petty posturing by all claimants, drowned out by overwhelmingly positive diplomacy and trade relationships multilaterally in the region.' You have failed to refute the fact that there is petty posturing by all claimants, not just China. You have failed to refute the fact that these petty posturings by all claimants is drowned out by overwhelmingly positive diplomacy and trade relationships with China. Your baseless opinions and allegations are worthless when one simply examines the reality. China overwhelmingly has good diplomatic and trade relations with ASEAN countries, no matter how much you want to provoke them.<< So good that you label (without any justification) any questioning of the effect of the theft of their resources a straw man. There is absolutely petty posturing by all claimants. Then there's organised theft backed up by force of the entire region by the PRC.
    1
  20. Need to let us know when the CCP has finished rewriting it. So far they've had a two month delay to massage the figures.
    1
  21. Fortunately, they're really bad at it :-)
    1
  22. And the PRC isn't really a country that deals with other cultures well. They also need people who are able to contribute more than unskilled labour.
    1
  23. In order for it to have had a useful effect, it has to kill far, far more.
    1
  24. Over seven of them.
    1
  25.  @user-ju8cn  it is Chinese territory. Republic of China Territory. Not people's Republic of China territory. There is no "international law" that says otherwise.
    1
  26.  @user-ju8cn  also, no one cares what history proves. It's not law. It's stories.
    1
  27. So until they die, keeping in mind births are still decreasing so we're not just talking about the current elderly, what do you do about those who are still consuming resources without being able to work?
    1
  28. They did make a long term deal with Hong Kong. Back in the 80's. However, one of the things 2020 was famous for was not being 2047. How do you deal with liars?
    1
  29. From where? And how do they attract them in sufficient numbers? And why would the people a modern economy really needs go there when the western world is also bidding for them (and offering both more money and a culture that's learnt to accept immigrants) Edit: Also keep in mind that mandarin isn't really spoken outside of China.
    1
  30. For the first in particular, it's interesting that you believe this. That belief is a major part of the problem. The CCP and its mouthpieces are basically just terrible at dealing with the outside world.
    1
  31.  @henryng7893  Do ytou have anything of subtance to add to that statement?
    1
  32. Is it incorrect?
    1
  33. Does any of this change the real world rapid decline in births that continues to this day?
    1
  34. Then with how things are going, they'll need to learn to do without.
    1
  35.  @SW-de3nb  the biggest problem with this is the people who need the most are likely to be those who can't afford to pay high prices. Now you could try doing it based on industry. Farms pay 1 per unit. Factories pay 2, golf courses pay 10. Then watch corruption have its way and see the emergence of a plethora of 18 hole farms
    1
  36. However you define it, you want anything to do to give a positive return on investment. You want to get more value out of something than the resources you put into it. That's as true for taxpayer funded things as it is for business activities. Otherwise you just become less sustainable with fewer resources available for things that are actually useful. It also means that resources that could be better allocated are poured into what's basically a vanity project. Like Australia could link every major city to Alice Springs by high speed rail and it would produce some benefits. But at an absolutely insane cost.
    1
  37.  @reeti5958  you should probably look into the declining birthrate, the wealth inequality between coastal and internal regions, the slowing economic growth and the massive amount of retirees who will need the money to was spent on unprofitable train routes Probably also take a look at the GDP per capita of the USA and Australia and compare with the PRC and ask yourself why if it's not worthwhile for these places that are vastly wealthier than the PRC, it's worthwhile for the PRC.
    1
  38.  @reeti5958  >>birthrate is declining in all developed countries.<< The developed countries you're referring to can all attract and integrate large numbers of immigrants. This isn't true for the PRC. Also, you say this as if they're declining at similar rates. According to official numbers, in 2015 there were 15 million births. In 2016 there were 17 million (the effect of the abolition of the one child policy). Last year there were 10 million births. That decline wasn't caused by the pandemic. It's part of a trend that predates it. Adjusted for population sizes, the US births are about 50% higher than the PRC's official numbers and increasing. >>Wealth inequality between costal and internal regions are the problem that the government is trying to tackle by connecting those places with these routes. The routes that are mostly in loss are built to connect those places with large cities. << If you're a migrant worker from one of those cities, you're not taking the high speed rail as a daily commute. And if it's not a daily commute, your focus isn't on the speed and luxury, but the ticket cost. >>Also wealth inequality between those places is also because most of their population do live in that part. It's obvious that where most people live and where most large cities are, would be the place with more wealthy people.<< True, but not really an argument for linking anywhere and everywhere with high speed rail as fast as possible. More of an argument for being much more discriminatory about how you do it and taking your time about planning and doing it properly. Edit: Also, if you haven't built something unproductive, you're not putting your finite resources into maintaining it. If you're not putting your finite resources into maintaining that unproductive thing, those resources can go elsewhere. Also, when you actually do build it, you're going to be building something newer and better, vs dealing with something that's already ten or twenty years old before it even started to be useful. >>GDP per capita using PPP of China is much larger. Australia don't even have population to compare it to anything. China has 3 times population of USA.<< And a working age population that's about to head into a rapid decline. Also, PPP is only relevant for things that are domestic. Australia isn't selling you iron ore at PPP prices, after all. >>. And a total different economy which is in development state rather than already developed where most people use cars.<< I'm guessing you've never tried commuting using car. If you're talking about car ownership as if it's relevant, you're not talking about distances or scenarios that warrant high speed rail.
    1
  39. Even if they were willing to, useful immigrants are on a global marketplace. How would they attract sufficient numbers of the sort of immigrants they need when they're competing against the developed world, which has: The ability to offer more money A better environment (in almost every sense of the word) Cultures that are more accepting of immigrants A language (English) that's spoken all over the world (not many people outside the PRC speak Chinese. It's a very difficult language, especially when it comes to reading and writing) To say nothing of how big the problem is vs literally anywhere else in the world with a declining birthrate. They don't just need to attract immigrants, they need to attract something like three quarters (I was originally going to say half, then I looked it up and did the math) of the world's immigrants to offset their annual birth shortfall.
    1
  40. Credit where credit's due, it wasn't just the CCP virus that did this. The utterly ham fisted and barbaric global reaction from the CCP played its part.
    1
  41. Mao starved people to death in their tens of millions. Deng stopped the CCP from ruining the economy quite as much, allowing people the opportunity to improve their lives. Yeah, obviously Mao is the one to emulate here.
    1
  42. Due to the barbarians in Beijing running the secessionist PRC being unable to accept that the people of independent Republic of China (formed 1912. 37 years before the rebel Mao officially seceded) want nothing to do with them.
    1
  43. The West is both wealthier, meaning it has more resources to throw at the problem and is capable of attracting massive amounts of immigrants. Also, not many western countries have birth rates that are nearly as bad as the PRC's (which is plummeting rapidly year on year)
    1
  44. So in what year do you think population decline week make the water issues manageable?
    1
  45.  @davidwong3652  or... It's possible to have more than one problem. Edit: and it's the working age population that's shrinking and the births that are shrinking. Overall population is still growing. With all those retirees.
    1
  46.  @davidwong3652  unless you're trying to claim that because these issues aren't unique to the PRC, they're not issues, I don't see your point. I also don't see what point of view makes not enough water or young people magically become enough. Can you explain how a different perspective would change these?
    1
  47.  @Hypogean7  this is true.
    1
  48.  @Fauzanarief-n7i  That doesn't contradict what I've said.
    1
  49. The educated ones are going to go as skilled migrants to the places that can offer the most money. They don't go or stay as refugees. The PRC has a GDP per capita of 10k USD. And what can provide China with enough people?
    1
  50. In order to be a pregnant man, you must first have been a baby girl.
    1