Comments by "Bob" (@bobs_toys) on "Secretary Yellen Dumps Cold Water on Chinese Dumping" video.

  1. So for them, who takes care of the elderly? And who takes care of the people who take care of the elderly?
    4
  2. 3.5 percent is just above the ideal band.
    3
  3. ​ @JonySmith-bb4gx you've claimed to be from new Jersey, Arkansas and Florida. All in your second language English.
    3
  4. Theoretical babies grow into theoretical workers.
    3
  5. ​ @JoshDillon the result of the CCP depiction they needed as many degrees as possible. Then bring unable to use them
    3
  6. ​ @douglassun8456 this. As soon as you leave the sorts of areas foreigners go, things degrade very quickly. I noticed years ago that most things are almost brand new or falling apart. There's very little in between.
    2
  7.  @trendel13  I'm someone looking at the aggregate numbers instead of cherry picking. Yes. Inflation was high. Now it's lowering. No, it hasn't affected everything equally. And the big thing is, as is pointed out in the video. This pain is coming anyway. Dealing with it ten years ago is better than now. Dealing with it now is better than in ten years. Unless you don't plan on being above ground in ten years, it should be sound logic.
    2
  8. ​ @brianniegemann4788 they wish it was a similar drop to Japan. What took Japan three decades took the PRC three years.
    2
  9. Everyone else who could take his place is dead or in prison.
    2
  10. It'll reduce the unemployment of the people most likely to cause trouble. But any positive impact on birthrates will be lost in the continuing plunge.
    2
  11. ​ @bobkoure right now. The better question is has he ever left China? You won't get an honest answer.
    2
  12.  @JackHawkinswrites  whatever the perspective, it won't be an American problem. Not really sure why you're bringing America and Africa into this.
    2
  13.  @LizardSpork  it's depressing how many people need to have ratios explained. Or that you can't eat your pension. That it all needs producers to mean anything.
    2
  14.  @edwardseavey1172  but it's not a Thanos style snap. It's a decline in workers and an increase in retirees. It's not about numbers, it's about ratios of workers to dependents.
    2
  15. You forget that retirees are still consuming resources, but aren't producing.
    1
  16. He Lifeng went to the US late last year. I'm guessing you don't want to apply the same logic here. This seems like logic you never want used against you. Before that, he went to Pakistan. If the PRC has a stronger economy than Pakistan, why did he go there?
    1
  17.  @amiigose  it's difficult to understand much from that broken English, but what's easy to see is my guess was correct.
    1
  18. ​ @amiigose you're projecting a little too hard 😘
    1
  19. The US having issues doesn't make the China issues any better. This is a weird mentality that only makes sense if a person's goal in life is to not be the worst at everything. "Our birthrate isn't so bad. Look at Japan and south Korea" (although next year it'll just be south Korea) Whereas in the west, as a general rule, by the time we're using "but China is worse" as an argument, we've already failed.
    1
  20. BTW, what issues were exaggerated?
    1
  21. You know what's more important than his motives? Whether he's accurate. His motives are completely irrelevant. Accuracy is everything. ​ @usmang5542 
    1
  22. ​ @usmang5542 also, maybe in that irrelevance, you could have included an answer on what was exaggerated. Could have, but like so many before you, didn't.
    1
  23. Not to the extent they need. And when there's full automation, what's the point in China? It'll go to the wealthy countries.
    1
  24. Will be? The three child policy came in years ago. Although with the birthrates, you could be forgiven for not realising the one child policy is almost a decade in the past.
    1
  25. ​ @brianniegemann4788 sounds like?
    1
  26. They did. You can be forgiven for not noticing . Although for forcing children, it would create problems while still making them wait decades to get a return. Why would 70 year old Xi want to create problems when he'll never live long enough to benefit?
    1
  27. Inflation isn't everything.
    1
  28. So where's he wrong?
    1
  29.  @jimkuan8493  so no answer. Just bluster. Gee. What a surprise.
    1
  30. When you're putting as many resources as they will be into supporting their elderly, say goodbye to growth. Retirees only consume. Their producing days are done. They might have savings, but they still need someone to produce their food, clothing and shelter
    1
  31. ​ @bevocorgi lol. Good luck with that.
    1
  32. Look at your demographics. That huge bubble of people about to retire. That lack of workers to replace them. The only way the PRC doesn't get to an even worse level of debt is if no one is willing to lend to it. Your old age will be spent in poverty.
    1
  33. When my wife came to Australia from China, she was amazed at how self sufficient our elderly are. Same thing when we moved to the UK. Also, check out the diabetes rate there. It's beating the US by a considerable margin, without nearly as much support infrastructure or awareness to help handle it.
    1
  34.  @Jason4Star  basically, there's a lot of mythologising about how Chinese are special. This covers everything from resilience as you mentioned to their bodies. Which is used to say that traditional Chinese medicine doesn't work for westerners, but does for them because they're different. Long story short, twenty years experience has taught me it's complete bollocks.
    1
  35. More than half of children born in China are second or third children. Now do the math on what that means when the birthrate has still almost halved from when people were only allowed one child.
    1
  36. At the scale of the problem, plus their ability to attract the migrants they need, this isn't happening.
    1
  37. They could. Being forced to "remove" your unborn child is one thing, though. Doing that to your parents is quite another.
    1
  38. They gave an unconditional surrender and allowed the US to remake their country in an image it found acceptable.
    1
  39. ​ @danieparriott265 they don't like hearing about anything more than raw numbers. As soon as you get into the slightest detail of what those numbers represent, it gets incomprehensibly bad.
    1
  40. If the answer is no, it should be easy for you to point out where he's wrong here.
    1
  41. It takes twenty years for that to begin to pay off. Xi is 70.
    1
  42. It sounds like you can point out where he's said something wrong or unreasonable in this video?
    1
  43.  @ScoobieDoo-zy1rh  south Korea and Japan are indeed going through this. That doesn't make the situation in the PRC better. Edit: to be very clear. You do NOT want to be in the situation Japan and south Korea is in. Being in the same boat as them is a disaster. Especially when that large population and low per capita wealth makes mitigating the problem so much harder. Plus. They've got a per capita gdp that's far higher than the PRC's. They can also attract immigrants (even if they really don't want to) As far as 800 million goes, do i need to explain the importance of ratios? It feels like I do that a lot.
    1
  44. Incidentally , the figures have been published for years. Official data says there were 9.02 million last year. Down from a high out 17.86 million in 2017 and 16.87 in 2014 (the last year of the one child policy) Official data also says that the working age population dropped by 10.75 million while the retirement age population increased by 16.93 last year. This has going to get worse over the coming years. Much worse. Omissions of stats don't make him wrong, BTW. Or misleading. Official data shows the situation is very, very bad. God knows what the reality is.
    1
  45. ​ @ScoobieDoo-zy1rh  >>per capita gdp is only one measure . However it is incomplete and at best misleading if not used appropriately. Purchasing power parity is much accurate in comparing countries<< I can use PPP if you like. Japan: 46K USD South Korea: 52k USD PRC: 22K USD >>What are the ratios in population trends which makes China newsworthy and not Japan which has an even greater population decline than almost other nations<< To start, there's the "new" in newsworthy. To continue, Japan was in a far better position when it started this decline than the PRC is now. Then there's the rate of decline. In 2000, Japan had a crude birth rate of 10 per thousand in 1990 and 6.8 per thousand in 2020 The PRC had a crude birth rate of 10.41 in 2019 and 6.77 in 2022 Or in other words, what took Japan thirty years took the PRC three. Last year, Japan's was 6.06 while the PRC's was 6.39 >>Japan has had a higher gdp than China for decades but that doesn’t help in reversing this trend<< I said mitigate. Not reverse. And they have far more resources per person to mitigate it. >>Further , South Korea and Japan are even more homogeneous ethnically than China and have even stricter immigration laws, in particular Japan. << 'They can also attract immigrants (even if they really don't want to)' Laws can change. That the PRC needs to attract enough people to compensate for 14x what Japan needs to (even more, considering the ongoing speed of decline) and almost 30x South Korea can't. At least not without taking drastic measures.
    1
  46.  @ScoobieDoo-zy1rh  >>your post implies that a wealthier country is able to combat population decline. Ideally that would be the case . Realistically that is not the case. Many dirt poor countries have population growth, for example many within the African continent. << Again, we have the difference between reversing and mitigating. Reversing means birthrates going up Mitigating means finding ways to compensate for birthrates going down.
    1
  47.  @ScoobieDoo-zy1rh  so basically, you skipped over everything that was said (I can see why. The facts were not on your side) , then based your argument on an inability to understand that mitigating doesn't mean reversing, but "having the effect of making something bad less severe, serious, or painful." Which I'd have thought was clear from the sentence you read (the only one you felt you could respond to) but here we are.
    1
  48.  @ScoobieDoo-zy1rh  speaking of speed of decline over the last few years, though. Japan births per thousand in 2020: 6.8 2023: 6.26 An 8 percent fall. PRC births per thousand in 2020: 8.52 2023: 6.39 A 25 percent fall. You probably want to stop talking about Japan as if they're in a worse state. Japan had a decline over decades. The PRC is going through a plummet. That plummet hasn't stopped. Even for south Korea, it took 19 years to go from 10 per thousand to 6. The PRC made that drop in 4 years. Your days of being able to point at Japan or south Korea and say "it's not so bad. At least we're not the worst in the world!" are very, very limited. For Japan, this is probably the last year. After that, congratulations on only being the second worst for that particular metric.... I guess. Yay? Maybe after this, we can go congratulate Papua new Guinea for its stellar law and order record. It's only got the second worst crime rate. Which is victory with Chinese characteristics.
    1
  49.  @ScoobieDoo-zy1rh  reasonable. YouTube is a pain. It doesn't change that even in that, though, you continued to act as if mitigating meant reversing.
    1
  50. So is he wrong? Or is this just another in a long, long, long line of whinges about reporting on the catastrophic demographic situation the CCP spent decades going out of its way to make as bad as possible?
    1
  51. So can you point out where he's wrong or unreasonable?
    1
  52. Plus the sheer amount of immigrants they'd need. Plus that not many outside the PRC speak mandarin. A drop in the bucket compared with the size of the problem.
    1
  53. There's the people escaping north Korea. I can well imagine them being touted as proof that the PRC is a desirable place to emigrate to.
    1
  54. Ratios of workers to dependents are the important bit. Not overall sizes.
    1
  55. They already are. Also, the Russian economy is small. A tenth of America's.
    1
  56. 6 billion mostly poor people. The global 80th percentile (which includes the US and Europe) are on a bit over 20k USD. It'll be lower if you remove the G7. Much lower. The 80th percentile for the US and other developed countries is about 70k USD. The 50th global percentile is about 7k USD. Again, this includes the G7. The 50th without them will be much lower.
    1
  57. Not to this extent. Especially not at this extent and low developmental level.
    1
  58. The issue isn't exporting lots, it's dumping lots at a lower cost than production or at a lower cost than where it's manufactured.
    1
  59.  @Mr.T-SI  that's Ford and GM making a loss. It's not the govt directly paying for that loss on each vehicle. Purchasers can get subsidies for them, but that's not the same as the company being subsidised for each.
    1
  60. What happens as they age, and there's still not nearly enough people being born? What happens to the current 40 year olds and younger when they hit retirement?
    1
  61. The consumer spending plan has come up about five times since 2008. Each time as if it's some new saviour.
    1
  62. Look at how many people outside the PRC speak mandarin. Then remember they need over 10m of those a year. Probably closer to 15m. Then remember they need to actually get these people to decide that the PRC is where they want to be. And they need useful workers. Ones with needed skills.
    1
  63. I know plenty about them. They're my whole job. Which includes knowing that they're not magic wands, which includes the cost and difficulty of implementing them, as well as the scarcity (and expense) of people who are able to implement them. We're in global demand, and the PRC simply can't attract enough of us to tackle the massive job.
    1
  64. And the visit by He Lifeng last year means what, exactly?
    1
  65. You should try telling that to the masses of PRC citizens who've given up on having children. How long do you think even that 5 percent growth (which isn't much, considering the 12.5k person gdp per capita) will last with a plummeting workforce?
    1
  66. Why would we want that? Is he saying anything incorrect or unreasonable? Or do you just not like the truth. If he's doing this, can you point out where he's doing it in this video?
    1
  67.  @Pmach29  just another imbecile who doesn't like the truth. If there was something wrong, you'd have said it.
    1
  68.  @Pmach29  so no answer. You just don't like the facts he presents.
    1
  69.  @Pmach29  the best propaganda is completely accurate. If it wasn't, you'd be answering my questions.
    1
  70. So where is this video wrong or unreasonable?
    1
  71. What in this video is wrong or unreasonable?
    1
  72.  @ScoobieDoo-zy1rh  so that's two responses in this thread that don't answer the question. It should be easy, if he's wrong.
    1
  73.  @ScoobieDoo-zy1rh  This would be the post I commented on after this, and still didn't say where he was wrong? (Not putting all the information you want right up front isn't the same as being wrong)
    1
  74.  @Angel-ei1ip  this will be going on the rest of our children's lives. Plus, the things the can mitigate it (immigration and technology) will be going to those who need it least (those who can afford to pay)
    1
  75.  @brulsmurf  and everyone is theoretically happy.
    1
  76.  @GUITARTIME2024  could be? I AM Elvis. In theory.
    1
  77. It's extremely consequential to everyone who plans on growing old in the PRC.
    1
  78. A lazy idiot is all well and good, but the last thing you want is a hard working idiot.
    1
  79. So you can point out where in this video he's wrong or unreasonable?
    1
  80. The fastest decline in birthrates. Don't tell us things are great. Tell the two thirds to three quarters of people who should have had children but decided they couldn't over the last decade.
    1
  81. Because they continue to barely consume. We've been hearing about a new consumption led growth plan every two or three years since 2008. Might as well ask why birthrates can't rise when no one has children.
    1
  82. ​ @Millnoc could be tried. But as we've seen from the decline over the last five years, either won't be tried or are ineffective. Clock's ticking. It takes over twenty years to turn a newborn into someone useful.
    1
  83. If something could be tried and made to work at a worthwhile cost, it would have been done five or ten years ago. ​ @Millnoc 
    1
  84. Both. Just like they don't have nearly enough women, yet women have problems finding a partner.
    1
  85. They still take two decades to grow and educate.
    1
  86. So assume the PRC goes to war and successfully invades Taiwan. Then what? Sending resources over land isn't very efficient. So that leaves sea transport. Even assume they have complete control of the first island chain and south China Sea. They need to get resources from Africa, which has the Indian Ocean (and India) between them and it. Or the Americas, which is obviously where the USA has an advantage. The country is painfully vulnerable to siege.
    1
  87. ​ @peacelover2008 so what happens when you get old?
    1
  88. Just another halfwit showing no signs of watching it. Who won't be able to point out anything in this video that's wrong or unreasonable.
    1
  89. So what's he said that's wrong or unreasonable? People keep saying this video is bad. No one is able to give any specifics on why.
    1
  90. Xi is 70. This would take about twenty to twenty five years to give a useful return. I doubt he'll bother doing anything except getting the shills he's sentencing to an impoverished old age to pretend things are all good. Why would he? It won't help him.
    1
  91. What can be done either has been done or they've been trying to for decades.
    1
  92.  @JoshDillon  they're already getting the best. As for those who remain, what they've learnt will become outdated or forgotten.
    1
  93. Yes.
    1
  94. With a dictator who's seventy.
    1
  95. We're talking about the govt that was blindsided by the effect of the one child policy. When you've been blindsided by the effect of stopping two generations from having more than one child, you lose any right to claim any sort of planning ability or intelligence.
    1
  96.  @DecemberNames  it was eight years. Xi had been in office for four years at that point. I'm not sure you know what decades means.
    1
  97.  @DecemberNames  it was eight years ago. Xi had been in power for four years. A decade is ten years. Decades as a plural means at least twenty years. Even then, it was moved to a two child policy. That went on until 2021. Now rather than abolishing it, it's a three child policy (as if it matters) They've learnt nothing.
    1
  98.  @DecemberNames  it was eight years. Xi was in power then. There's still a three child policy. The two child policy was only replaced in 2021. This isn't ancient history.
    1
  99.  @DecemberNames  it does feel like it belongs in the history books. But no. Same people. What's in force now is only a modification of the policy. No lessons have been learnt.
    1
  100. 111.1:100 according to the China daily.
    1
  101. The birthrate certainly has. Same with the construction industry. What happens to a country when its people simply give up on reproducing? And before you mention Japan or south Korea: 1. They ARE in trouble. They're not countries you can point to to say "they're going through it. Everything is fine" 2. The PRC's collapse in birthrates has happened far faster. It took Japan 32 years to do what the PRC did in three.
    1
  102. How long do you think even that reduced number (5.3 percent with a gdp per capita of 12.5k = a long time spent being poor) is going to last with the demographic collapse that's well underway? Keeping in mind that it's not total numbers that count, but the proportion of workers to dependents.
    1
  103.  @jych-db5iy  the problems in the PRC are purely self inflicted. Why should I feel sympathy? BTW, I was in Hong Kong during the protests and the national security law implemention. Go down it is, but the CCP is capable of doing everyone huge amounts of damage as it clings on to power. You can also guess what happened to my remaining shreds of sympathy then. And if you think that doesn't include your own country (do we need to pretend you're not Chinese?) then I'm interested in knowing what happens when they lose power. What peaceful ways are there of forming the next govt? It should be an easy question to answer that doesn't rely on them being in power forever. If they're not willing to sacrifice China to stay in power that little bit longer.
    1
  104.  @jych-db5iy   I knew you wouldn't answer that last question 🤣 No one who says the PRC is going well ever does. As for the rest of your optimism, tell the people who've even given up on having children they'll see the US collapse. They could do with some cheering up.
    1
  105.  @jych-db5iy  and it looks like you have no answers to what should be an extremely basic question. This is two posts where no attempt was made. I'd be interested in seeing where I've cursed or lacked manners, but far more important than imaginary things that would be irrelevant if they were true is the question I asked earlier. Otherwise, as far as anything I'd substance goes, the answer to the question on who'll shut up first is clearly you.
    1
  106.  @jych-db5iy  yet another post without an answer. Or any answers. What a surprise. 😉 Time will indeed tell. You'll be right in the middle of what finding out what being unable to answer that very simple question means. (I can answer it. I saw the answer a couple of years ago. I've got a good chance of seeing it answered again in the next year) And unable to escape it. Or an impoverished old age.
    1
  107.  @jych-db5iy  lol. It's the best answer you can give, anyway. The questions I ask are more definitely not my illusion. You can see them here. But hey. It's illegal for you to even think about the years of bloodshed and instability that you'll get to enjoy, courtesy of the suicide pact the CCP's forced you into. It must suck that giving an honest answer to a reasonable question (what happens when your govt falls is an EXTREMELY reasonable question.) is a literal crime where you are.
    1
  108.  @jych-db5iy  never heard about FLG. Just like I've never heard of a single wumao (and I've asked many) who can answer that extremely simple question. At least, it's a simple question for someone living under a civilised govt.
    1
  109.  @jych-db5iy  oh, Falun Gong. No. However, you don't need to have had someone want to harvest your organs to have a problem with the CCP and its creation. You also don't need to be a member to know that you've made multiple posts since I asked about peaceful means the PRC has to form a new govt after the CCP loses power. Posts that haven't come close to even attempting an answer.
    1
  110. ​ @JonySmith-bb4gx lol @ "we"
    1
  111. With the newborns plummeting, the workforce dropping and the retirees starting to sky-rocket, how long do you think growth will last? I get the feeling you won't be feeling too good about that large population when you consider how many are returning. And 5.3 percent of 12.5k is 660 USD. Which is still 63k USD short of having bragging rights. Really, it just highlights how the PRC grew old before it grew rich.
    1
  112. ​​@markhunt5019 you realise that the birthrate has been recognised to be a problem for the best part of a decade, right? Whatever is being done to fix it is failing. It's not as if they've got all the time in the world. The clock is ticking. Edit: it's more accurate to say the clock has ticked. Considering it takes about twenty years to make a child useful, a start needed to be made long ago.
    1
  113.  @markhunt5019  now anyway, with that clarified, we come back to the original question. With all that's happening, how long do you think that growth (if it's even accurate. The people aren't breeding like they believe they can afford children) is going to last? And no, assuming wishful thinking like they're going to double the birthrate in a very, very short time (or at all in any meaningful time frame. Remember to add twenty years to whenever they start to even start to benefit) isn't an answer. If they achieve it, they'll be the first. If they achieve it fast enough for it to matter, that'll be two genuine miracles.
    1
  114. ​ @markhunt5019 thank you for the demonstration of what the CCP actually does when it recognises a problem. It makes lots of noise about how great its fix is going to be, it sends out its shills to prophecy wonderful things to come. And as soon as it becomes too hard, it does its best to ignore it.
    1
  115.  @markhunt5019  this is a wonderful example of how the CCP really deals with problems. By ignoring them and running away.
    1
  116. And worse. The cultural shift. When the one child policy was going, there were about 15 or 16 million births. Only ten years later, it's 9.08 million. According to the official data.
    1
  117. ​ @depth386  it's not remotely as extreme. Plus Canada, etc can attract immigrants. The decline in birthrates that took Japan three decades took the PRC three years.
    1
  118. The relevance of ratios of workers to dependents (especially elderly ones will well never work again) isn't obvious to you?
    1
  119. They've announced a plan to do exactly that. More to the point, they've announced a plan to do exactly that about five times since 2008.
    1