Comments by "Bob" (@bobs_toys) on "PolyMatter"
channel.
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
>>This is alarmist. Sounds like you are saying China is facing an impending but slow moving catastrophe. That may be true, but is entirely misleading. Because there are many other countries with even lower birth rates<<
Can you name them and give their GDP per capita vs the PRC's of 10k USD?
For the ones you did name:
South Korea - GDP per Capita 31k USD
Singapore GDP per capita 60k USD
Spain GDP per capita 27k USD
From the Global Times (which I'll rely on to never exaggerate how bad things are)
"China's birth rate in 2020 was recorded as 8.52 per 1,000 people"
Those are 2020 numbers, when there were 12 million births. Last year, there were 1.4 million fewer births (A drop of over 10% that's part of a downward trend that's been going at roughly that speed since the two child policy was introduced in 2015 - Now the births are about 5 million per year fewer than the last year of the one child policy. It's not just the current births per year that are the issue, but the catastrophic rate of decline in such a short period)
And how does the PRC's ability to attract immigrants compare with these other countries?
>>Even if it is true that China's real fertility rate is 1.4 instead of 1.7, what is 1.4 billion ÷ 2 x 1.4? There would still be ONE BILLION babies in the next generation.<<
The issue isn't total population, but ratios of workers to dependents.
If the elderly died as soon as they hit retirement, there'd be no problem.
Instead, they live for decades after retirement and require increasingly expensive medical care while becoming less and less able to contribute anything at all.
>>Even with this "catastrophically" low birth rate, China would still make more babies than any other country on earth except for India. Does this put things in perspective?<<
Is the PRC going to start killing off its elderly?
Even if they're supported by family instead of the state, they're still a drain on resources and productivity.
>>It is premature to worry that China is about to collapse. Spain has a fertility rate of just 1.24, and nobody talks about that. Singapore is at 1.14, and South Korea is at 1.052. Does anybody know about THAT?<<
You just named three countries that are capable of attracting large numbers immigrants if they choose to.
Spain's net migration is about the same as the PRC's birthrate.
Singapore is a wealthy country that can pay immigrants a high amount. As is South Korea. Compared with the PRC, they also don't need to attract as many immigrants to offset the ageing population.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@JohnSmith-qk4rm >>Clearly you have no direct interaction with a real Chinese<<
My wife is Chinese. We've been together almost twenty years. I was also living in Hong Kong from the start of the protests until National Security Education Day last April.
And even if I'd never met one, that wouldn't change a single thing I said.
If someone's as ignorant of what they're talking about as you're suggesting I am, it's normally easier to make them look like an idiot. You don't need to flail about looking for something that sticks.
>>No wonder your sources of information are all twisted into strange western ways.<<
You're... Often wrong about stuff, aren't you?
>>PRC is for the Chinese just the country name of CCP.<<
This is why I take care to say PRC instead of China. I'd hate for it to be confused with the independent Republic of China.
>>Hard for western to believe or even imagine. But all CCP members are elected from PRC people, selected by the PRC people, and work for the PRC people. In another word, CCP is like your parent's name in your family and PRC is your family name for all Chinese. With this fact cleared, everything you mentioned becomes clear. Just nothing but western bias. <<
This is simply a complete pack of lies that's unrelated to anything we've been discussing. It also has pretty much zero link to anything that you hadn't gone out of your way to force into this conversation while you were resorting to more whataboutism.
>>And now let me ask just one simple question. If your system works so well, why was 831K innocent human life lost in the last 2 years? More than the combined loss of US soldiers in WW1 and WW2? Why do you constantly refuse to under this question directly? What is your fear? Facing the fact?<<
You've never asked this question before. You've simply stated the number while trying to give reasons to not talk about the PRC's problems.
I don't know if I should put this down to an intentional lie, or you simply being so far out of your depth that you don't even begin to know what you're talking about.
The answer to this question is contained within my previous post, however:
"You're right, the Western world should stop the greed that makes us turn a blind eye to the barbarities of the CCP.
It's not a civilised government, it's high time we stopped letting our desire for money make us pretend that they are."
Or to put it another way: All those millions around the world have died of the CCP virus because we pretended that the CCP had formed a civilised government. Instead of the lying barbarians they really are.
3
-
3
-
@JohnSmith-qk4rm First off, I'd like to thank you for throwing away all pretence at doing anything except pushing the CCP's lies.
To begin with, I'll reiterate that the CCP, who are not synonymous with the Chinese people are a bunch of barbarians who've shown they'll use the resources of the state to preserve their right to "struggle cuddle" (I can't use the R word - youtube deletes it) whoever they like.
These are the brutes you're supporting. The same brutes who've gone out of their way to ensure your future involves bloodshed when they fall (all governments fall, after all)
>>Now I really got it enough educating an idiot.<<
It seems like if you were dealing with an idiot, you'd have done a much better job and wouldn't be jumping from point to indefensible point.
Seriously, if you're doing this badly against an idiot, then we can only be grateful for the one child policy which has hopefully stopped the country from having more like you. It's saved the PRC future unaffordable welfare leeches. (If you're doing this badly against an idiot, you're so far gone you're obviously of no use to any civilised person. I'm amazed that even barbarian organisations like the CCP find a use for you. You're certainly not doing them any favours by speaking for them)
>>Do not even try to separate CCP from its people, because CCP is the people.<<
No it's not. It's an unelected govt introduced by a foreign power that's terrified of the people it rules over.
>>You keep seeing China's inland politics as a replica of the US, that is why you never understand what I am talking about.<<
The problem is I do understand what you're talking about, but your lies don't stand up to close examination. Which is why you've had to resort to whataboutism and keep jumping from point to point.
>>China doesn't have 2 parties <<
Because the CCP is terrified of a choice between it and another viable govt, which is why it's put the PRC into a choice between it and a civil war.
>>and arrogantly separating CCP from the people is also nothing but an act of idiocy. <<
Idiocy is supporting a govt that you can't peacefully transition away from.
>>If you want to really understand what China is doing right now the last thing you want to do is to listen to a banana man because even they might look like Chinese, but in fact, they are not anymore<<
It's funny, isn't it?
The people who 'support' the CCP are those who'll be (literally) murdered if they oppose it. Those who are away from it and able to safely speak their minds are bananas who aren't real Scotsmen (Sorry, I mean aren't real Chinese)
3
-
3
-
3
-
@JohnSmith-qk4rm Well this is a post full of projection :-)
>> You know what, in a civilized world, no one talks so aggressively like you do. <<
The 'gum on your shoe' (to quote the global times) finds this statement interesting.
I'm guessing that you don't think nuclear war happening as a consequence of hurtful (and accurate) words isn't aggressive in your book.
You're a child.
>>We use facts and direct experiences to support our mind<<
Your jump from whataboutism to whataboutism after you couldn't support your initial position shows this to be a lie. Although it does show that by your own criteria, you're not a civilised person.
I have fulfilled this criteria, which is why you jump from topic to topic, but I'm quite happy to stick to the topic at hand (or whatever you bring up)
>>not some biased and racist source of Information.<<
Racism is an overused accusation coming from those who support the barbarian CCP. Even used in such ridiculous situations as explaining the Hong Kong protests. You'll need to find something else. That term has been used to the point it no longer has meaning.
Anyway, if anything I say is wrong, you're free to actually discuss it, rather than jumping from argument to argument to see what sticks. As it is, it looks like there's nothing in your head except a few talking points given to you by your employer (if you're making arguments like this for free, that's somehow even more shameful)
>>And the most important aspect in a civilized world is we have the ability to agree with disagreeing.<<
I'd agree.
This is an ability that's lacking in the PRC. Agreeing to disagree with the barbarian CCP ends badly.
Which is why both of us are able to have this discussion openly on an American service. It seems unlikely that we'd be able to have it on Wechat. We couldn't even discuss tennis there.
>>The last thing we the civilized world will do is externalization. Separating people into smaller groups and labeling them with that very disrespectful term "barbarian", this could only be done among the barbarians<<
If using the resources of a state to protect the party's leadership's right to use Chinese women however they like isn't barbaric, I have to wonder what is.
And that's only the tip of the ice berg.
It looks like your main thing here is that your feelings are hurt by some well supported honesty (again: if I say anything unreasonable, you're free to challenge that. Your jumping from topic to topic shows that you know you're unable to deal with the facts presented)
By your own criteria, you are indeed a barbarian.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2