Why Xi is Quietly Re-Nationalising China’s Economy

[@Random-ne3ed]

In the US corporation runs the government. In China government runs the corporations. Literal yin and yang lol.

[@simonburrows137]

yeah our system looks bad until you try that way around XD buinesses are greedy and that sucks but governments are thuggish and power/ego driven witch i think is more scary

[@Ultravenom1]

When the US government finally rolls over, even the largest corporations can be shattered like glass. If a politician can get more lobbying money from desperate smaller companies than an overconfident big company, they will do all they can to break up the company. This is one reason that modern corporations drain tons of cash into lobbying, it's a bribe.

[@angeldroidcs4962]

​@@simonburrows137 tbh I would rather have greedy corporations with free speech than the other

[@jonunciate7018]

​@angeldroidcs4962 When they can afford the best lawyers, the only free speech they care about is the kind that they like. Then those corpos throw around frivolous lawsuits such as defamation all the time. Musk literally tried to sue advertisers for refusing to run adds on X because they disagreed with him. They cry free speech every time someone calls them out for not taking a stance against misinformation. Free speech has never meant you can say whatever you want without consequences... unless you have money or power.

[@kennethkho7165]

​​@@angeldroidcs4962 i think people generally agree free speech is good and censorship is bad, but the topic being discussed is economic policy, i read a gallup poll that most americans don't support money in politics and corporations running the government, this includes capitalist voters that distance themselves from "corporatism" (a misnomer, it is in fact academically known as oligarchy or cronyism)

[@RandomDeforge]

to use Pinochet as a positive example is absolutely wild.

[@Haseri8]

typical liberal TLDR, making excuses for fascists because their economy "worked" the way America told them to

[@acabradohorizonte]

Why? He was great!

[@Also_sprach_Zarathustra.]

@@acabradohorizonte No.

[@gabrielgaujac8170]

@@acabradohorizonte If you like condors in a bag…

[@SouthPeter98]

Chile is still the richest south American country

[@IceniBrave]

You had me at "strategic pork reserve" 😋

[@lachlanchester8142]

Your mums in my strategic pork reserve

[@michaelthomas5433]

There are also strategic maple syrup reserves. Like in Canada. For realzs.

[@lighting7508]

I wish we in the UK had a leader who had strong views on pork markets 😢

[@chillxxx241]

Famine is a real and recurring issue in China. Many unemployed college graduates are now being sent back to rural regions to assist in farming and be “re-educated”.

[@martinpalm5]

@@michaelthomas5433 There are also a strategic Texas tea reserve in the US

[@leadwall8264]

Damn.... "Periods of catastrophe" that is definitely one way to describe the death by starvation of over 30,000,000 people, and more by other methods.

[@pedromachado8513]

Fake news

[@CaptainTodger69]

and they never include the millions of babies Chinese women threw down wells to die...

[@mrsunsfan-gz2lx]

30,000,000 people for the prosperity of a nation of 1.5B people.

[@exdeath64]

@leadwall8264 to be fair, if you saw a bunch of sparrows kept eating your crops and its the fifties you'd think "Let's waste these sparrows for more food". Turns out, they just lacked the understanding of the web of life we have today that informs its something of a bad idea

[@lordcirrhosisofliver]

@@exdeath64 we had that understanding in the fifties, mao just didn't know what would have been basic knowledge to any scientist or even scientifically literate. It's almost like people that aren't experts on subjects shouldn't make major decisions like that 🤔🤔 mao was famously VERY stupid, it is why china got so much better after deng came to power, because unlike mao deng was smart enough to understand things like "long term consequences" and "cause and effect"' Deng: China needs more steel, we should improve our steel industry. mao: china needs more steel, we should force all of our farmers that don't know anything about metallurgy to melt down all of their kitchen utensils and metal farming equipment.

[@DampZombieNugget]

No one with a working mind would cite Pinochet’s Chile as a “success” 💀 unless your are the one who benefits while millions suffer

[@pascualromero8245]

Well it is all you had to do is look life standard before and after Pinochet. So why no working mind again?

[@johnwayne6646]

wasn't it literally the most successful country in south america

[@spacemario]

Chile is literally the only first world country in South America. Almost all South American countries had military dictatorships, but the one in Chile adopted good economic policies.

[@felchap1205]

Chilean here. No the "miracle" is mostly a farse told by neoliberals to justify a coup. Economic growth was poor (1.9% annualized) and poverty was rampant during the dictatorship. Families didn't regain the purchasing power they had in 1970 until 1990, after the dictatorship ended. The only ones that profitted were the rich and well connected with the dictator.

[@NathanaelTak]

Yeah, I almost spit out my food when she said that.

[@RaymondKeen.]

Given the ongoing global economic crisis, it’s essential for everyone to focus on diversifying their income sources beyond government reliance. This means exploring investments in stocks, gold, silver, and digital currencies. Despite the economic challenges, now is still an opportune time to consider these investment options.

[@TinaJames222]

Achieving substantial returns isn't just about investing in stocks with large price swings. The key lies in managing risk in relation to reward. By properly sizing your positions and consistently leveraging your advantages, you can steadily progress toward your financial goals. This principle holds true across different investment strategies, whether you're focused on long-term investing or day trading.

[@PaulKatrina.]

Even with the right strategies and assets in place, investment returns can still vary between investors. It's important to recognize that experience is a key factor in achieving success. I came to understand this myself and sought the advice of a market analyst, which helped me grow my account to nearly a million. I wisely withdrew my profits just before the market correction and am now capitalizing on new buying opportunities.

[@ScottKindle-bk3hx]

Please can you leave the info of your investment advisor here? I’m in dire need for one

[@PaulKatrina.]

Finding financial advisors like Melissa Terri Swayne who can assist you shape your portfolio would be a very creative option. There will be difficult times ahead, and prudent personal money management will be essential to navigating them.

[@Hectorkante]

thank you for this tip , I must say Melissa, appears to be quite knowledgeable. After coming across her online webpage, I thoroughly went through her resume, and I must say, it was quite impressive. I reached out to her, and I have booked a session with her.

[@everypitchcounts4875]

China doesn't have a private sector. CCP has members overseeing every company and CCP members on the board of companies.

[@leandro6234]

based

[@thatKQ]

Big if true, sadly not reality.

[@oceanwave4502]

So you want private sector to stab in the back of the nation if it suits them? (private sector) Ever wonder why manufacturers left the US in bunch since 1980s?

[@deezeed2817]

That’s true of large corporates. But they still are market entities and have to be profitable. Party members ensure that this private capital doesn’t go against Chinese interests by aligning themselves with the global bourgeoisie.

[@myosotis4507]

​@@leandro6234Guess which mid-20th century German government did that also

[@augustus331]

Can you please stop using hyperboles? Every time countries have their routine political issues or China releases lukewarm economic data, TLDR's thumbnails are always as if there's a real diplomatic/economic catastrophe.

[@TitusFlavius11]

Clickbait is pretty much the only way for these daily youtube channels to survive

[@genbab6989]

re-nationalisation is not a catastrophe

[@Ar1AnX1x]

people have made clickbait popular and viable, I blame people for clicking on every single clickbait video

[@Talisguy]

@@Ar1AnX1x "People" haven't.

[@rinnepy]

They have to play the KZbin game to have their videos recommended. That's just how it is with KZbin, if you don't abide by its "rules" then you're not gonna be favored.

[@bangmo7]

1) Not public sector....but SOE. State owned enterprises 2) Great Leap Forward was not meant for collectivization of agriculture. Mao tried to build modern factories in the collective farms by mobilizing peasants. For example, every farm built its own so-called steel mill and ended up with coarse pig iron scraps. The result was a disaster, a total collapse of economy. Hit by famine, about 50 to 70 million perished. Still every Chinese bill carries Mao's face on it as if this mad mass killer is the only one worth respect in the entire Chinese history.

[@madsam0320]

The rural small smelting furnaces were a failure, but they has little to do with the famine which lasted for almost two years. China was having good first ten years under Mao when the population boomed by almost 400 millions, having shrunk after decades of civil wars and foreign invasions. Also it’s grossly overblown to say 50 to 70 millions perished. It was reported as 5 millions years ago and that is dubious enough but kept blowing up. The true figure might not be known, but testimony of those people going through the period, there were no mass deaths although some people are known to died from malnutrition related illnesses. Old people are more likely to remember the flooding of the Yangtze to stop Japanese invasion by the KMT nationalist government that caused a far more devastating famine.

[@fredrickmansav6852]

@@madsam0320 reported as little at 5 million by liberal elites who were lying to preserve socialism's image, a disturbing trend amongst their kind.

[@lipingrahman6648]

Maybe Mao just hated the Chinese, a sort of internalizes racism.

[@someguy8375]

the famine was also significantly worsened by the campaign to eradicate pests, including sparrows, which then lead to a huge locust boom.

[@madsam0320]

@@someguy8375 LoL! It’s just typical western media myths, repeating itself. There is one, just one documentary where they filmed the pest eradication methods and it’s nothing to do with the famine. Those anti Chinese communist tales might be used in the past but anyone who have been to China and talked about it with some old folks in rural areas will be met with puzzled looks. In many countries, including the US, there have been mistakes made that caused far worse environmental problems, but nobody talked about them.

[@NutiketAiel]

Did you people actually refer to fascist dictator Pinochet as an example of a success of "shock therapy?"

[@argentarcadium4489]

I don’t believe they did - I believe they were referring to what was used as examples of successful shock therapy when the world bank was trying to convince China originally

[@gdf_6c]

No, they were referring to what neoliberalists think, who absolutely adore Pinochet. Here in Brazil our last finance minister had actually proudly worked for the Pinochet regime. Needless to say his term was catastrophic.

[@bemnared4245]

Sir this is corporate media. They would promote killing orphans if it made GDP go up.

[@NutiketAiel]

​@@gdf_6c@argentarcadium4489 You're both right, I misheard. They were indeed referencing the arguments being made by the folks advocating for "shock therapy" and not referring to Pinochet's regime as an actual success story.

[@auditorium.1922]

China is more fascist than Pinochet lol.

[@hurobiont1054]

Unlike the Soviet System, theoretically atleast, China also had a "National Bourgeosie". The Soviet NB were more quasi-legal, China also had more true, or truer co-ops, allowing for easier marketization.

[@JebBush-bf6tp]

Referring to Jack Ma, as being "disappeared" is pretty disingenuous. It's not like a Stalinist, or Putin "disappearing" they just removed him, he didn't turn up with 12 "self-inflicted" gun shot wounds to the back of the head.

[@ToneyCrimson]

"He didnt disappear, we just dont see him anymore. " Is that what you are saying?

[@victorb5]

He did disappear for over 3 months, and when he returned he was different. They disappeared him, ran him through their brainwashing/torture program, and brought him back after he had been programmed minus everything he owned. So small step up from being dead I suppose? This happened to a number of other wealthy businessmen and because they weren't so internationally known they were not heard from again.

[@JebBush-bf6tp]

Love the month late, entire paragraph schizoposting ♥

[@kayime6580]

Xi jinping is doing what Mao zedong did "Great leap backwards"

[@brianburgess3231]

well said .. after all Deng did to fix Mao's mess too

[@fba90130]

Deng did it to save communist party. Xi did it for the same reason.

[@piccalillipit9211]

.

[@azumishimizu1880]

Its funny that Xi loves power more than the development of China. Xi Jinping is the greatest gift to have happend for the USA. He is single handedly destroying China.

[@ssuwandi3240]

Except printing $50 billion😊 QUIETLY

[@arrow1414]

This is not surprising. About 60% of the Chinese economy was always state owned. Heavy industries like steel and coal and oil were never completely privatized, which is partly why they could still call themselves Communist despite all of the (non essential) companies getting all of the attention.

[@shinji1264]

Why aren't Americans this intellegent...?

[@arrow1414]

Well, I'm an American so...

[@dennisestradda9746]

@@shinji1264hahaha why these chinkiisss support a government that constantly massacres them by the millions? Han life worth📉

[@jacobgordon7998]

Why do people make dumbass blanket statements, like the poster who first responded to the OP?

[@armandoventura9043]

​@@shinji1264 That is not intelligence but protectionism, and that is not good at all, there is India as an example

[@timothytumusiime2903]

Well it's a damn good thing that they refused shock therapy Its shit economics 😒

[@jrko0]

Yeah just look at Pinochet

[@shryggur]

Or at Poland

[@FakenameStevens]

No it's not

[@familyguygaming_]

Russia & the Soviet bloc utilized shock therapy after the fall of the USSR, and Russia still has not recovered

[@bluegamer4210]

@@FakenameStevens It's complete ass

[@simonburrows137]

can you please cite your sources i cant find more data on this

[@bad209]

There are no sources. largely the western media and show like "tldr" largly spread misinformation and "feelings" as fact its the every year china will "collapse" news slogan all over again. Since 2001 every(western) news media has been saying it. 23 years later and the media says its still gonna collapse except china 10x bigger than UK economy (in 2001 china had smaller economy than uk). and China is a larger economy than US. China economy is going through a transformation from export economy to an import economy and largly moving thier factories to african nations. thier agriculture to largly to latin americans and some of thier services to close asian countries. thats distrupted industries in china but it will grow them into the next phase of growth. this also means the global south will be more aligned to the china and former global south economies will be more prosperous than european societies.

[@thesheepthemightythecrazy]

It is all pure BS.

[@nachosaenz1828]

My bro told me

[@briancarroll0]

Notice how they didn't show the private sector's percentage of GDP receding? That's because it isn't. The market cap of companies doesn't show a trend of China nationalising its economy, it just shows that China's private sector public companies were overvalued and are now undervalued. Whereas, the public state-owned companies are in more stable businesses and don't see their valuations fluctuate as much as the big tech companies in China. If China's tech companies were fairly valued their share of market cap would rise. This doesn't show a trend in nationalisation it shows a trend of depressed investor sentiment. On the Chinese companies buying land off developers. How is this any more unusual than what Western economies did in the great financial crisis. Ireland bought thousands of houses off bankrupt developers to finish them and sell them off. China is doing the same??? VC funding also doesn't show a trend in nationalisation. VC funding happens mostly when companies' values are high so that the companies can sell shares in their businesses to investors at high prices, and as previously mentioned private sector businesses aren't trading at massive values in China anymore. A drop in private-sector investment is also expected to happen when the economy slows. Businesses don't invest money when the economy slows down otherwise they'd be just throwing it away but the government and state-owned enterprises do continue to invest as they're the ones trying to restart the economy. I'd actually love to debate the journalist for this video on their ideas about how China is somehow more nationalised than it was in the early 2000s or the 90s. Like ask yourself for a minute do you really think China is more of a centrally planned economy than it was in 2010, 2000 or 1990??? I mean come on.

[@samsniper2000]

TLDR has never been right about china, they're British and fall squarely into that sphere of influence, it wouldn't surprise me if they're paid to shit out china is collapsing content by an investor or if it's just good SEO content.

[@generalsmite7167]

I don’t think you’re wrong but they gave other reasons why China is having more nationalization and I don’t think they ever claimed they were more nationalized than they were in the past but rather that China is currently nationalizing more businesses and are seeing it as a trend

[@Topagendadolla]

@@generalsmite7167yeah what is the guy talking about. The video is just saying the trend is nationalizing his going back up. Which history shows if not stopped is a bad thing

[@vhdlx]

they arent even really nationalising. they let private companies and foreign banks into china. up to 40% of state owned co. are allowed to be owned by private investors. They are still heavily privatizing.

[@alanwong9550]

I think you have overestimated the intellectual level of the audience here. Most of them I think barely have the ability to think independently.

[@imakevideos5377]

The public sector built china to where it is today, its estimated that without the hsr system 30 million more cars would be on the roads leading to way more imports and less money circulation in the economy. Plus state owned companies have built more factories in China than private companies even if they were built and sold to the private companies

[@goodisgood153]

State owned shit also tend to lie about their numbers. So that they get the ire but they have to always report good things. When was the last time you heard bad things from a government ? They would never admit anything themselves

[@NathanaelTak]

This is a discussion about the economy. It doesn't mention that in some countries the economy serves the people, not the other way around. Wealth disparity has gotten out of control with the increase in capitalist practices, so it's time for the government to take care of its people as it should do and put the economy to work for everyone.

[@frantisekhajek6775]

Isn't China also bad at wealth inequality, especially the rural-urban divide? You also must realize that people don't own state-run companies practically. They are run by the state, which is run by the CCP and CCP is more and more run by just the president. So we can say one man controls 60% of the economy, which is off the inequality chart.

[@NathanaelTak]

@@frantisekhajek6775 Yes there is wealth inequality. That may be why they're addressing it, unlike what is done with oligarch owned companies. You are factually inaccurate about the ownership models there. I'd recommend reading before speaking out.

[@frantisekhajek6775]

@@NathanaelTak Well if they take away your pension and healthcare if you dispose to move from to rular areas to developed ones, they may also address the problem. Please tell me what about ownership did I state wrong. Do you as a Chinese get any benefits from these states run enterprises? Do you get their dividends? And the fact is, the Chinese regime is an autocratic one, since you cannot change your politics because you only get one ticket.

[@NathanaelTak]

@@frantisekhajek6775 Just saying fact doesn't make it fact. People vote for representatives who run the government, the same as in the US. Also, if a national company makes money, it does help the nation, whereas a private company's success is not shared with the people working there, but with a class of wealthy investors. This exacerbates the wealth inequality. I don't even know what you're referring to with the pensions, but I'm guessing it's a fabricated talking point you've been programmed to repeat. I don't want to do your research for you.

[@frantisekhajek6775]

@@NathanaelTak It is not. If a Chinese moves to a richer province, his work here will not be added to his pension criteria. Look it up. With your point of voting, would you be OK if all of the citizens of the US would only be able to vote Democrat? Think what would happen to the party if it didn't have any competition.

[@chrisgoeswest9882]

Is this young lady the usual news reader for this channel? I am subscribing!

[@hdswashere]

Gotta say, I'm not really feeling this video. It was like a student reading a term paper into a microphone. Maybe 5% news, 95% history padding to make the video longer.

[@38vocan]

yeah, honestly so little information... Don' t know if I can really take away anything from this video

[@JamesKerr-z4o]

I don’t agree

[@chpsilva]

Maybe it's just me but I felt the additional information useful to build a context.

[@BassDawStew]

This channel is primarily padding.

[@chpsilva]

@@BassDawStew considering the channel name is "TLDR" this is quite the statement.

[@McClelland-i7b]

From $5,000 to $25,000 that's the minimum range of profit return every week I think it's not a bad one for me, now I have enough to pay bills and take care of my family.

[@AbelardoPacio]

I'm 32 years old. I reached my first 100 thousand dollars in just three months I started with 30k investing in Bitcoin ETFs and other dividend income. My medium term goal is to reach one million dollars before I turn 45.

[@MikeGilbert-m4k]

This year I reached 200 thousand dollars investing in Bitcoin. It was exactly one year and 4 months, I already accelerated to reach 200 thousand, I think I will reach the goal sooner.

[@McClelland-i7b]

Francisco expertise is truly commendable he has this skill of making complex trade easy to understand.

[@McClelland-i7b]

he often interacts on Telegrams.

[@McClelland-i7b]

Using the user.

[@yzerman123]

It seems that many of the "trends" described in the video are mostly a near-term cyclical effect, not a long-term secular decline.

[@daharos]

pretty sure the Chinese economy has been on a down turn for years at this point.

[@TV-ex5qq]

好景気の後の不景気は辛いぞ 日本から🎌🇯🇵

[@NeistH2o]

Watashi wa Neist desu, adjimemashite! 😄

[@jermasus]

speaking from the bubble experience?

[@ファンp]

経験者は語る😂

[@edhe2001]

As a chinese who just travelled to China last month, can say China's economy is not in a good shape now

[@hehe8012]

by what standards ? the stock market ? China doesn’t care about those things. They care: do the people have healthcare ? Are they fed and can they live a proper life ? Not by the western standards, where the hypothetical “stock market” is the sign of a healthy economy.

[@alexc6926]

How about you look at the youth unemployment data that they stop publishing numbers on? During mass amounts of chi’s war workers retiring. How about domestic consumption continued lowering and country relying more on exports while facing tariffs from Turkey, Brazil, EU, Chile on top of the US ones. Chinese companies rely on foreign markets not their own, Shein, Temu, TikTok can all be ended in one day by closing loopholes or applying the same restrictions/treatment China gave foreign companies

[@ClaudioCarrera-j6o]

@@hehe8012 hahahh wumao imbecille!

[@Cryptic.0_o]

​​@@hehe8012 You really are just saying things with no clue of what's happening. What about a housing and employment crisis, with rapidly slowing growth?

[@edhe2001]

​@@hehe8012 high youth unemployment, bad working condition(like unpaid overtime work), collapsing housing market(considering chinese household wealth is tied to the real estate market, and it's over 30% of chinese wealth. So when it is bad, China's economy is bad), diminishing and low foreign investment, and bad job market(new graduated students literally can't find job and even master students), also bad business environment...and so on. Also if you wonder about health care in China, they do not have free healthcare in China, also you have to pay before you get treated or diagnosed by a doctor(unlike in US, where healthcare is also shit, but still you pay after treatment. And if your healthcare id registration is with areas below tire 2 cities or even tire 2 in some cases, you are screwed). And the fee is only low if you earn your money in the US, and when considering in Chinese wages, it's nowhere low. Do you want me to continue?🤷 I grew up in China, so you can ask me if you have more questions. Also, at last, people there do care about stock market, may not everyone, but a lot of people, they put their savings and income into the stocks and hoped they could have good return. So stop telling what we care and what we don't.

[@EthanZoid]

90 percent history and 9 percent adverts 😢

[@notthedroidsyourelookingfo4026]

Excellent presenter. Very clear, very easy to listen to and understand, even for me as a non-native speaker.

[@Ben-rd3mg]

I'm absolutely no fan of command economies but omg this video has such a capitalist bias it's actually crazy. Name dropping Pinochet like he somehow saved the Chilean economy is laughably inaccurate.

[@DIYcooperation2010]

This video was of pretty shoddy quality for TLDR standards. Such a reductionist view of China's development

[@Minimmalmythicist]

I agree I´ve made a similar point.

[@WhhhhhhjuuuuuH]

It's TLDR, too long didn't read, it's literally reductionist that's the entire point.

[@Minimmalmythicist]

@@WhhhhhhjuuuuuH There´s a difference between summarising things and being innaccurate.

[@WhhhhhhjuuuuuH]

​@@MinimmalmythicistI look forward to your video on the topic you can educate us all 👨‍🏫👩‍🏫🧑‍🏫

[@Minimmalmythicist]

@@WhhhhhhjuuuuuH Ok, you´ve proven that you have the mind of a five year old child

[@chenyangfan1444]

TLDR: no insights

[@TM.25.0]

Xi thought that being the world's factory would allow him to walk over his buyers. But China's economy is one of convenience. The Americans and Europeans can find other nations to make our things. And if its more expensive, so what, we have the money to spend. Talk about letting success go to your head.

[@JacobPaul-n6p]

Some economists have projected that both the U.S. and parts of Europe could slip into a recession for a portion of 2023. A global recession, defined as a contraction in annual global per capita income, is more rare because China and emerging markets often grow faster than more developed economies. Essentially the world economy is considered to be in recession if economic growth falls behind population growth.

[@Theodorebarba]

My main concern now is how can we generate more revenue during quantitative times? I can't afford to see my savings crumble to dust.

[@oliviathompson1846]

It's a delicate season now, so you can do little or nothing on your own. Hence I’ll suggest you get yourself a financial expert that can provide you with valuable financial information and assistance

[@Lewistonwilliams-f5i]

Very true! I've been able to scale from $50K to $189k in this red season because my Financial Advisor figured out Defensive strategies which help portfolios be less vulnerable to market downturns

[@Alexanderjames-rv2ik]

How can I reach this adviser of yours? because I'm seeking for a more effective investment approach on my savings?

[@Lewistonwilliams-f5i]

'Jessica Lee Horst, a highly respected figure in her field. I suggest delving deeper into her credentials, as she possesses extensive experience and serves as a valuable resource for individuals seeking guidance in navigating the financial market.

[@trollalolololol]

Wish you’d mentioned the effects of shock therapy on Russia.

[@UK.KennyBrown]

I wish they added more to these videos. They end abrupty talking about sponsers making the video feel half finished. Maybe they should consider adding some dicsussion about the topic with an expert or between the presenters.

[@luisbroscheit7834]

Any sources?

[@ltkwok]

Interesting that the decline of China’s economy corresponds fairly closely to Xi ’s tenor.

[@justinwolf7490]

He’s taking them back to Mao days and it’s failing terribly

[@fr2ncm9]

@@justinwolf7490 He should be called Little Mao.

[@meteorknight999]

US sanctions and economic war is result of slow growth But its still growth the Nasdaq stock market crashed in trillions where as theirs didnt

[@ErmisSouldatos]

yes, it is easier to assert totalitarian power over the population if they are poor and you control the economy

[@zacksmith5963]

Funny how usa sanctions are ignored ?

[@J_X999]

I still think a lot of this is just part of necessary transitions within the Chinese economy. For example, the real estate sector could not have continued in the way it did during the 2000s and 2010s. More state ownership seems to be a more sustainable path for the sector in general, even if the short term pains result in a depressive economic environment. People are out here comparing Xi to Mao, but they fail to realize this is the only way forward. If Xi continued to inflate the property bubble, those same people would be criticizing him for doing so. The Chinese miracle is definitely over, but it's about time when you consider the large structural flaws within their unsustainable model of growth.

[@garettjames6349]

Xi created the bubble. They need state control to fix all the state control that caused the problem? Lol.

[@Testimony_Of_JTF]

No because the governement is generally worse at managing resources than the private sector, even when it comes to housing. The housing market isn't doomed to create bubbles. The reason the bubble was born was mostly just governement interference really

[@chinesesparrows]

No, Xi's wolf warrior diplomacy and xenophobic education and policies has hastened the exodus of trade. CN would be far more powerful if it had quietly continued prioritizing cooperative business than amping up hate. For example all its neighbors and trade partners had an ok view of CN until some terrible policy enraged them during Xi's reign.

[@oceanwave4502]

Define "miracle"! What does it even mean? 10% growth per year? But with 18k billion GDP, how could China maintain that growth rate? if western model is so great, why is Germany in the decline? (zero percent growth)

[@LeMAD22]

The bubble was caused by the state too large in the first place.

[@ChinchillaBONK]

Why is the Yen symbol used in this video? Yuan has one less stroke

[@sunnohh]

TLDR quality analysis

[@jkostelac]

The same ¥ symbol is used for both currencies.

[@doujinflip]

It's stylistic, depending on who made that font. Much like how you don't always see dollar signs with two strokes.

[@baiwuli6781]

it's for rage baiting

[@hehe8012]

@@baiwuli6781why does this induce rage in someone ? genuinely asking

[@NotUnymous]

The answer: Because he is preparing for war. He said he wants war. He even said when and with whom, no matter the consequences. He is building the infrastructure for it. He is building the military complexes for it. And he's upgrading the army for it. I mean...surprise! He even is preparing the economy for it...? Nah, it would be rather strange if he didnt.

[@marcusbrown188]

They wanna be like the Soviet Union? Also companies are slowly leaving China and going to Vietnam, India, and Mexico

[@J_X999]

@@marcusbrown188 They've been going to Vietnam, India and Mexico for 10 years now. At the moment, it isn't happening.

[@rkdeveloper1681]

Mostly to India.

[@rkdeveloper1681]

​@@J_X999India has advantage over Chinese because of English speaking Indians .

[@LuisAldamiz]

USSR was great: most of the world's advances (public healthcare, 8 hr working journey, kindergartens even) are because of the USSR (or to lesser degree Mexico).

[@joemeltingbutter6668]

@@J_X999 Seems like you are a paid bot trying to defend China's national interest. Unfortunately for you that payment will eventually stop too as there won't be anything to defend. Tell us how the economy is doing in China. Factory owners ARE moving abroad. Your only advantage is the 30-35T infrastructure that has been built up over the past 3 decades. That will slowly decimate and mean absolutely nothing to the rest of the world as people enjoy cheaper labour.

[@Devil-advocateO.o]

I saw an interesting video where they remind us Rome has fallen but China still stand after 5000 years of history. They learned from their mistakes and improved themselves. I saw China have high speed train that's faster than Japan. Have their own space station. Working on 6G. Their phones are better than Apple. They're working toward self sufficient on chips production because of US sanction. When I checked China tour, their city looks very clean and high tech, particularly their train stations. Foreigners even make videos saying they prefer to raise their children there from g violence. I'm a Three Kingdoms fan and I've noticed China still have Zhuge Liang temple and others. Their best Steam seller is Black Myth Wukong. I think they sold 10 millions in 3 days? I forgot to mention China have lifted 850 Million Out of Poverty and become the second biggest economy in the world. Why can't India and the Philippines do that?

[@joeblodontchno5309]

china is a rogue country.. all the western countries that gave it technology & money to develop from abject poverty are trying to decouple from this commie dictatorship.. plus china has major problems with every neighbor because it steals their land & sea territory's.. just look at the recent clashes with the phillipines which called china the "greatest disrupter of peace" in Asia..

[@zollen123]

Shock therapy defies common sense. I would always prefer a more sensible approach of "One step at a time".

[@tru7hhimself]

especially when they give pinochet's chile as an example. we all know how well that ended.

[@AYTM1200]

I agree in principle but in a democratic dispensation future governments may not see the step by step progress through to the end.

[@zollen123]

@@AYTM1200 Those whose proposed shock therapy may not have understood democracy as democracy is an evolutional process, not a big bang. American democracy itself evolve over 100+ years to become what it is today.

[@LuisAldamiz]

Tell that to the West, which is applying protectionist shock therapy everywhere and especially in Europe.

[@peterfireflylund]

@@tru7hhimselfeconomically, it ended very well.

[@CLaw-tb5gg]

The biggest plot twist in history would be communism ending up winning the Cold War.

[@thegame7557]

Are we approaching 1990 because last time I looked it's 2024

[@locorum9103]

You'd need to have a very strange definition of 'communism' for that to make sense, though

[@theformalmooshroom9147]

The Cold War ended with the fall of the Soviet Union, so I'm not sure who you would figure that

[@itsr3ns_490]

Capitalism is a dictatorship of capitalists, like america. Socialism is a dictatorship of the people, like in china, cuba ​and vietnam etc @@locorum9103

[@clot27]

communism achieved through path of capitalism? that would be crazy

[@vietimports]

that feeling when you realize how quickly china hyperfinancialized their economy before reaching peak prosperity and so are forced to decouple from capitalism and reintroduce some more hard line state centralized planning. china's goal was always to use capitalism as a means to quickly create wealth and use socialism to distribute that wealth. instead they speed ran 200 years of financial and economic development in 50 years and reached the hyperfinancial point of their economy, but are still generally poorer than the US. as a result they brought widespread prosperity to their people but also have a gigantic wealth gap, which is particularly bad for a population of their size

[@valorzinski7423]

Gigantic wealth gap is always a good thing for superpower states, any sufficiently big country that has global influence and militarily powerful rivals needs a huge wealth gap to continue existing As long as America continues to exist and continues to be a superpower, China and Russia needs its population to have huge wealth gaps

[@coolbanana165]

@@valorzinski7423 Why would a big wealth gap be good? It just seems to harm people.

[@vietimports]

@@valorzinski7423 china's population lived through their miracle economic development. meaning people are still alive who saw china have double digit, sometimes up to 20%, gdp growth. now that china only has 5% gdp (something most countries would literally kill for) to the chinese this feels like a depression

[@LuisAldamiz]

They can't ever be as rich as the USA because the USA consumes 25% of the global economy and they are more than 4x the population (i.e. they would consume more than 100% of what Earth can produce, leaving all the rest with nothing at all, not even food). They would also become fat like the North Americans.

[@valorzinski7423]

@@coolbanana165 the wealth gap creates an underclass that will produce while the resources are sent to third world countries to buy their support Without the wealth gap, the production rate falls behind rivals with the wealth gap just like The Soviet Union vs USA

[@petemarchetto4998]

Interesting video. I lived in China from 2000 to 2021, and though I thought I was taking an interest I didn't realise there was so much happening in the background. One thing I did hear batted around was China's intention to start back on the road of socialism once it could afford it, and that some economic theoreticians saw that as their goal. I wonder if - given Xi is more inclined to Maoism than any of his post-Mao predecessors - there isn't a higher level of intent here than reaction to circumstance? I'd also say that Deng seemed to take much of his economic model from Thatcher and Reagan, particularly trickle-down, and much as that has been denigrated in the West for doing no more in a saturated economy than ramp up inequality, in China - with so much latent potential - it really did work as a kick-start. The trouble is the degree to which guanxi - in essence, party connections - stilted the private sector and undermined it coupled with problematic regulations in setting up a private company excluding many potential innovators. That seemed overall to kick-start the economy well, but also meant a low ceiling on attainment at which point the economy became prematurely saturated and trickle-down ceased to function as a wider boost for the populace. Xi has certainly been concerned about inequality, and younger generations were going into 'lying flat' mode, feeling that their aspirations without connections would never be met however hard they worked so they may as well cease to strive. Absolutely fascinating video, though, (and being no expert all I've said above is suspect and open to correction). Thank you for this. Oh, and no one reading this should take me TOO seriously. :p

[@sehriyarmemmedli26]

After a year of “china is collapsing” videos, now i am excited to be exposed to a new propaganda series of “china is re-nationalizing” videos for the next year. 🎉

[@badluck5647]

Economies don't go into deflation when citizens are confident in the country's future.

[@Ar1AnX1x]

it reminds me of the U.S. economy is collapsing, buy gold now, buy crypto types of things, along with people fear mongering how the U.S. is falling apart because migrants are destroying it, and even though none of these things ever actually happen it still works to fear monger on people

[@Ace-990]

Just look at the statistics ccp releases, it ain't looking good

[@EdinburghExile]

Governments tend to renationalise parts of the economy when they are in crisis. For another current example see the UK government renationalising rail and reintroducing direct state involvement in the energy generation sector. It's not happening because the country is in a healthy situation.

[@cia5649]

@@EdinburghExile well it depends since they either nationalise or let them fail

[@theiqwaver3801]

To paint Deng Xiaoping as a hardcore free market advocate and Xi jinping as a hardcore planned economy advocate is disingenuous as even Xi jinping's policy of common prosperity, is taken directly from Deng Xiaoping : "There cannot be poor communism, nor can there be poor socialism. So to get rich is no sin. However, what we mean by getting rich is different from what you [the interviewer] mean. Wealth in a socialist society belongs to the people. To get rich in a socialist society means common prosperity for the entire people. The principles of socialism are: first, development of production and second, common prosperity."

[@godzillamothra5983]

When Deng Xiaoping started the opening and economic reform, he said "To be rich is glorious and some people will have to get rich first". Now 40 years later, Some people already got rich, some even too rich, it is time to kick start the next phase, bring the distribution of wealth to more people. Chinese workers' wages are increasing, housing bubble is popped, tech monopolistic behavior is curbed. It will be a painful and messy reform as we can see, but it is necessary for long term health of Chinese economy. Xi knew the time is ripe for that. How did he know? Because when he was about to be elected as the Chinese president by CCP, he faced a serious challenge by Bo Xilai faction, and Bo Xilai faction was using the inequality as the main weapon to block his ascendancy. While Xi managed to purge his opposition, he also knew the time to address the inequality is now, and growth at all cost is leaving China and him vulnerable, especially now that the US has turned protectionist.

[@zacksmith5963]

that explains why usa is under 40 trillion $ debt to China .

[@zacksmith5963]

​@@godzillamothra5983that explains why usa is under 40 trillion $ debt to China .

[@zacksmith5963]

China survived holocaust

[@Alexander-yb1zc]

Its the next step, We're seeing that a true free market economy is not possible as industries like Utilities and energy will never be able to have true competition forming monopolies and oligarchies that extort the consumer. Where it is possible to have competition (ie the current state of fast food) it does benefit the consumer as it leads to innovation and low prices but very few industries have a low enough barrier for entry, investment and scale up potential for that competition.

[@Minimmalmythicist]

it´s a logical claim but I think empirical reality often shows that isn´t true.

[@EmpirealDemocracy]

Good thing that China refused shock therapy. That would have been a disaster.

[@caleblee1780]

It sounds like… 1. Less foreign investment equals less private sector. 2. Less economic growth incentivizes the chinese government to nationalize industries since the private sector is a threat to authoritarian governments. 3. The crackdown on tech is part of an intentional move to limit the size of the private sector in relation to the public.

[@dinamosflams]

the private sector's political power is a threat to the rights of workers and society as a whole

[@Jon-ch6sr]

LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO "private sector is a threat to authoritarian governments". The german private sector in ww2 would like to have a chat with you.

[@caleblee1780]

That german government only lasted 12 years, so not exactly a beacon of an authoritarian government with a long lasting and independent private sector. Most of that german governments economy existed under war time and therefore the gov had an unusual amount of power over their private industry. When the private sector grows, their economic power grows and with it their cultural and political power. All of that is a threat to authoritarians.

[@u2beuser714]

​@@caleblee1780 Thats not true , singapore is a good example of a country having a huge private sector and despite that its authoritarian by and large. I wish modernization theory could stop being relevant when it has been debunked so many times

[@dustin1211]

@@caleblee1780 wealthy business owners were not a treat to the government in 1933-1945, they literally funded the rise of the nazi party and were happy to profit from free forced labor, you should read some history books and not blindly follow US propaganda XD.

[@bwhog]

Except that it is China's restrictions on the market as well as their constant meddling in the financing sector and the like that has caused this. Remember, when the private sector expands beyond a certain threshold, it represents a threat to the CCP and that cannot be tolerated.

[@julianbullmagic]

Because China is humanity's best hope. Thank god for the People's Republic of China.

[@extrapolate]

Imagine saying this to a tibetan or Uyghur whose families have gone through decades of genocide and ethnic cleansing at the hands of the CCP. You’re vile.

[@zacksmith5963]

​@@extrapolateawwww u are worried about uyghurs ? Tibetan ? Go lecture israel. I ll Wait 😆 🤣 😂 😹 😆 🤣

[@zacksmith5963]

​@@extrapolate 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 laughing at you . Native Americans anyone ?

[@jackiecooper9439]

Ppl forget the groundwork laid by Mao. He just failed to use it. Deng effectively built on it. Deng didnt pull a rabbit out of hat.

[@DanielBlak]

Mao also killed 50 million of his own people so.....

[@joshuasmith5289]

Thatvwas the point all along. Capture the worlds businesses with the lure of a billion consumers. Let them build manufacturing infrastructure, force them to give all rights to their chinese subsidiaries to do business, nationalize it all leaving no value or assets to outside investors, profit

[@emrebennett2857]

Better than letting companies into your country then allowing them to take over all your assets and government resulting in huge inequality and the creation of a rent economy

[@mabeSc]

Mixed ownership might just work. The "shock therapy" that these Western "experts" recommended left Eastern European economies in ruins, damaging the industry sector permanently. China is doing the right thing by not going down the traditional and reactionary economic policies rabbit hole-- they can politically and economically afford a hit for better long-term stability. Also, placing a price on high-tech yet (still) unprofitable industries is not possible. Eastern Europe lost so much -- their indigenous industry was literally turned into scrap metal, with no second thought regarding the long-term.

[@userwastaken3069]

Oh god, the tech industry had 1 trillion dollars disappear? they better watch their airspace...

[@prateekbhurkay9376]

Is that a 9/11 reference?

[@wendymaxfield]

China's economy is litteraly mostly privatized already, the 10, 50 maybe 100 biggest ones are already partially owned by the government, one way or another. And this is a great strategy, main reason why its economy boomed liked that for the past 30 years.

[@zacksmith5963]

Prove our

[@Minimmalmythicist]

There´s a lot wrong with this. For starters China actually overall grew in the Mao period. Yes, there were disasters like the great leap forwards, but overall China grew faster than Britain did during its industrialisation. Indeed, initially Mao was one of the more pro-Market Stalinist leaders, he moved away during the Great leap forwards, but then Deng moved the economic policies to the right again and that did increase growth some more. The Deng reforms did plenty of economic good, though I think he should have left more of the social welfare system intact. Indeed, Deng was quite influenced by Bukharin´s NEP implemented after the Russian civil war. It´s not quite true that "privatisation" fuelled the economy either, it was more that private industries were allowed in more sectors. I would argue myself that this was a justifiable move to get more US capital, but it´s important to recognise that this was done in a very controlled way, i.e the Chinese government retained a lot of control of the economy. Indeed, the Chinese state railways have played a big role in industrialising the country, as have the state owned energy companies. Myself, If you ask what economic model I like, I think there´s a lot of evidence that having a balance like China´s, i.e 35-50% state owned, 50% private works. I think markets can reduce the kind of bottlenecks that the Soviet Union had. I also think it´s now time for China to implement a proper welfare state, if you´re an officially socialist country, it does look a bit embarrasing if there are people with difficulties getting access to healthcare or if there are huge wealth inequalities. Also, it´s time to give people some more holidays, the country can easily afford it. I see myself as a pragmatic socialist, I think the CCP have done a fair bit of good for China. In the West, we may not agree with everything they do, bu they have improved ordinary people´s living standards a lot. I myself am a democrat, I support having a parliamentary democracy, but it´s no surprise that China, given its history, isn´t one and that most Chinese people don´t really want one.

[@WhhhhhhjuuuuuH]

lol

[@Minimmalmythicist]

@@WhhhhhhjuuuuuH Well, you say "lol" I guess you´re so childish that you laugh at facts. Economic growth was about 3.6% on average during the Mao era. The UK in the Victorian era had an average growth rate of about 2%.

[@WhhhhhhjuuuuuH]

​@@Minimmalmythicistlol

[@Minimmalmythicist]

@@WhhhhhhjuuuuuH yeap, you´re a man-baby

[@bigorna4875]

Great analysis

[@taco7043]

lifting of price controls... lifting of tariffs ... equals the process of marketization. Then wtf are we doing now in the US?

[@Observer168]

The pervasive bribe culture in China has led to staggering losses in the financial industry, amounting to hundreds of billions. This systemic issue has resulted in a significant number of bad loans being issued in exchange for substantial bribes, undermining the integrity of the financial system and contributing to widespread economic instability. Reforms and changes may be painful, but they are essential. It's time to confront rampant corruption and reckless spending head-on. The banking industry has become entangled in a culture of bribery, which has not only compromised ethical standards but also resulted in substantial losses that will take decades to recover. Those who issued billions in loans while pocketing substantial kickbacks must be held accountable. China cannot allow these practices to continue if we hope to restore integrity and stability to any financial system. How else can China recover from the hundreds of billions in bad loans if not through austerity measures? The responsibility for these big losses rests with those who exchanged bad loans for gifts, not with President Xi. Hong Kong has a long-standing reputation as Asia's financial center, and leveraging its resources and expertise would be highly advantageous. The Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) in Hong Kong has extensive experience in combating financial crimes and is renowned for its commitment to transparency. The pressing question is whether China is prepared to embrace such reforms and whether Hong Kong will continue to be regarded as an outsider in this evolving landscape. Engaging Hong Kong's strengths could be crucial for fostering greater financial integrity across the region. A Hong Kong-based external auditing team could play a crucial role in enhancing the integrity of China’s financial system. By providing independent oversight, this team could foster greater transparency and accountability, essential for a stable economic environment. Their expertise in international financial standards could help identify risks and improve regulatory practices. While the team would need to navigate the complexities of operating under Xi’s regime, their involvement could serve as a critical step toward modernizing and stabilizing the financial landscape. By establishing a framework for independent audits, they could help build trust among investors and the global community, ultimately benefiting China’s economic standing. The collaboration could pave the way for a more resilient financial system, capable of withstanding future challenges.

[@zacksmith5963]

Ironically, when hear the supposed descriptions of China, - think this is really the description for the United States . Tens of millions of Americans are at the financial breaking point. We are SO close to going under.

[@dakidokino]

Deng Xiao Ping really did well, sadly, they believe it's a weakness for the party because of pride and greed and power to not democratize them to the people. War is inevitable without democracy (or what most countries are, a democratic-republic), even in the modern era. The Chinese energy was very respectable when the world was becoming fans of Chinese culture as much as Japan's anime today. A full democracy has no representative, but even at this level they're scared to truly give policy power to the people in the world.

[@uplink-on-yt]

Reading the comments before watching the video: it just sounds like the state is stepping in to fill the gap left by collapsing private enterprise. Sort of like QE2 and other nationalisations in the west, then?

[@piccalillipit9211]

NO. They are moving from a rapid growth model to a steady state economy model - unlike the west they realise infinite growth is not possible on a finite planet and they know that private companies need to grow infinitely

[@aizensplan8946]

Well that's not exactly the full stor because the tech secter was smashed up before the economic woes due ot the ideological stance of the ccp.

[@NunTheLass]

If you don't care about the people they become farmers. If you want to lift them out of poverty, you make them work in factories. Preferably by keeping wages low and exporting as much as you can. But if you want to cross the last hurdle you need a large base of domestic demand with enough cash to buy the goods your industrial base produces. Even ignoring that exports might stagnate, not doing so hurts the smartest and most entrepreneurial of your people. They will fix it for China, one way or the other, it's not cultural, it's nature.

[@JohnJaneson]

This is literally the plan to begin with.

[@zacksmith5963]

that explains why usa is under 40 trillion $ debt to China .

[@thuynder]

this is great, actually...

[@sagetds1995]

China knew that shock therapy would be a disaster for the economy and standard of living. Russia learned this lesson the hard way in the 1990s.

[@frantisekhajek6775]

It worked in Estonia thought.

[@tnsocialist1257]

It's not much different. The United States does the nearly the same thing. The private sector here socializes its losses but we differ in that the gains are privatized.

[@damobdaking]

Deng Xiaoping was no free marketeer, he believed in a planned economy. Xi, is going back to Deng Xiaoping policy, because he sees the failures of unrestricted capital, and greed.

[@BruceJ999]

The West want Oligarchy for every country soo they can exploit their resources..Soo it hurts them when China wants to go full communism

[@henrytep8884]

But China was never an unrestricted capital, so how did he see the failures? In fact the USA is not an unrestricted capital market either. We’re both mixed economies.

[@vhdlx]

xiao ping did not believe in a „planned economy“ lol... xi literally established „deepening reforms“ commission which pushed for more and more privatization and even allow foreign banks into china. Modern china is not communist. they just kept leninist party infrastructure while moving towards Liberal economy.

[@biocapsule7311]

Very much so. It's been very well known that Deng seek to model China's economy after Singapore, which has a veneer of pro-market, is very much State controlled. The Singapore government is the majority share-holder of most of it's major and vital industries. And being the regional trading hub, sets the regional trading standards. That's how Singapore operates, and it's similarly what China has been doing for decades in their own way. They would let a private company do what it needs to do, *to a point.*

[@biocapsule7311]

@@henrytep8884 Not really. Economy is economy, be it communist, socialist, capitalist etc. All nations trades the same, there is no magical unknown means of trading method that separate communist from capitalist. What separates it is how the method and amount of intervention within the market, and how wealth is redistributed. The primary economic goal of all leftist politics (regardless of branches), is to prevent people who can wield private 'capital' as political power (AKA capitalist, like space karen Elon Musk, Murdoch etc). On that, the US is basically a captive government. The rich basically decide who will be elected via donations, and sets government policies.

[@jaderdavila]

Government is a damn dear thing. But China achieved a cheaper government with the unique party, since all the infighting does not have to be paid by the taxpayer

[@HKim0072]

lol, there are factions in their government.

[@thomashisted5984]

just because there is only one party does not mean there is no infighting.

[@enonh82]

To be fair in the West, with our current economic system general standards of living our actually declining.

[@fillipe4700]

Some sectors should be public owned due strategic reasons and collective interest

[@CoolDude-m2c]

Agree

[@jgwizo]

Why do people misinterpret economic issues without recognizing the USA and western activities as deliberate barricading the economies into groups. China demonstrated the western nations thought they could keep the rest of the world dependent to them. China is a model that is proving that hard work results into success. In a race its axiomatic that the game is gone and the best approach for the western countries is to cooperate than continue on a USA led hegemony.

[@amosmunezero9958]

Pure capitalism is not sustainable, and pure socialist and communist policies often lead catastrophic economical collapse and reduction in productivity, so there is striking balance that needs to be found in between!

[@tru7hhimself]

don't forget that pretty much all experiments in socialist policies have been met by u.s. sanctions cutting the affected countries off from international trade (cuba, ...), the installation of a military dictatorship by the u.s. (chile, ...) or by outright war (vietnam). we haven't seen yet how a country with socialist policies would end up without massive pressure from outside.

[@mikicerise6250]

I wouldn't call blasting what was on the verge of becoming the world's leading tech sector to smithereens "striking a balance". 🤣 But whatever, you do you, Xi.

[@mycodingchannel9690]

"communist" "economical" You didn't read the book bro. Those words don't go with each other.

[@patriot9487]

subhuman animals replied to you

[@shanak123]

Why is the SSE 50 market capitalization only $2t. Or am I wrong? With a GDP of $18t, is the top stock index purposely undervalued or does it mean C has more wealth outside the stock market. Ignorant question but willing to learn

[@justnotgood5628]

me when everyone says GDP per capita = QOL, ignoring the fact that china (excluding a certain great leap forward) was outpacing most developing countries in terms of life expediency, infant mortality rates ect. Don't get me wrong I don't think it was perfect by any means and there is much to critique about the Mao's governance, but I doubt the ding Xiaoping era would have even been possible if it weren't for modernization efforts which increased industrial and agricultural production to never before seen levels in China.

[@hanshengchen615]

Except it wasn’t quiet

[@zacksmith5963]

No proof no source of claim

[@raylee5030]

"Re-nationalization of weak sectors and more investment on modernizing these and making it more sustainable to run in the future"

[@3X3-n3j]

I mean the UK wants to renationalise the railway- because it’s absolutely horrible. I’d be up for it tbh.

[@khaledtharwt]

Because west is withdrawing investment

[@godzillamothra5983]

Rather than nationalising, I would say China is curbing the monopolistic behavior of the corporations that have almost free wheeling for the past 3 decades, especially in tech sector.

[@davidescristofaros2241]

if you're a maoist you think that, otherwise you know it's all CCP propaganda what you just said

[@locorum9103]

​@@davidescristofaros2241 Bro you have a NATO flag as a pfp, you probably think anyone not advocating for privatisation of water and electricity is a Maoist

[@davidescristofaros2241]

@@locorum9103 I don't. Touch some grass

[@andresgarciacastro1783]

This has been the plan since the beggining... It wasn't hiden...

[@hehe8012]

China is doing right. They protect their people. As for America….

[@Connor-jl9gq]

Govermnt is Sluggish, Stubborn and Moral Business is Swift, Inovative and Heartless

[@bjinlei4402]

so US start a trade war bt govermnt, is it commonuist? SO fuckk, I am chinese, i am sure USA IS NOT a captilsim

[@ohyehyeh]

Why is there a photo of Winnie-the-Pooh in a story about China?

[@oisinquinn9469]

Xi is winnie the poohs doppleganger

[@josephlee8765]

But people says we want freedom not authoritarian form of government.they want to be free not slaves , they want to vote for their officials not just pick up by the regime.They want freedom of religion,/ worship, they want freedom of speech so they can erpress what they want & what they don't want to a government, they want human rights because they own their body mind soul & spirits.they want to free to organize, they do not want to be dictated by the regime, butwould rather decide for themselves / thats freedom of choice.

[@1990SammieJ]

Perhaps I'm wrong but some of the graphs seem to be conveniently framed, it almost exaggerates recent trends whereas the start of the video looks back decades 🤔

[@davidstrelec2000]

40 years of Mao? Hes been in power just since 1949 and died in 1976.

[@zacksmith5963]

@@davidstrelec2000 and took china from nothing to a powerhouse

[@chris-ew8jv]

Based China Hoping my country takes note and nationalizes the resource sector

[@keaixiaomeinv]

The host talks exactly like the usual host, yet they are clearly not the same person. This is crazy!

[@jwhite5008]

The person talking to the camera is not necessarily the one composing the text. They probably have a writer and several teleprompt newsreaders like a normal news show

[@marcussver620]

Everyone in the comments complaining about the lack of diversity in Western countries but No one is talking about the lack of Diversity in China even tho china is talking Africa and South east asia countries.

[@MarktYertd]

Exactly

[@PityOnlyFools]

There are only 10 comments rn. Who is “everyone”?

[@KungFuWizardOfJesus]

Literally no one is complaining.

[@ThePvPDestiny]

You must be a bot, there's 15 comments and not a single one has mentioned diversity.

[@kijangberburu5991]

Literally no one said that here, chill down lil bro

[@BenjaminKeller]

I kind of like her better than the other guys

[@sjinnylee]

So well researched! Giving lots of important historical contexf

[@mchparity]

There are so many asterisks, I just can't with this propaganda. 雙軌制 & 國進民退 are probably the only two accurate phrase in your entire essay.

[@francolopez2460]

I'm pretty sure this was the plan since Deng

[@vladimircurkoski1455]

Maybe they concluded that you really don't need billionaires and that they are actually bad for economy. Imagine instead of heaving two billionaires with 500bil you have 2.milion families (7-8mil people) with 250k $ Those two men would spend maybe 100-200mil if they buy some superyahct and private jet while in second case people would spend all 500billion buying houses, cars, vacation or whatever so some other people would get those money (millions of them) instead being hostage of just two men

[@zacksmith5963]

In usa 3 companies went bankrupt in just last 1 year . And we are talking about china lol

[@FernandoPerez3h.]

In my view, the quickest fix for this issue would be to integrate more LGBTQ+ parades and drag shows into the Chinese economy, as they could play a significant role in economic development.

[@Mateomartinez-u1z]

Good point 🫰

[@roterStern1917]

It is the CPC!

[@Belloking1]

No room in China for western financial colonialism

[@Gabor-y3h]

Obious sign of focusing on greater plans.... they have built up their economy using enterprenours because with central control they could not achieve this level of development in short time, but now it is time to take over the industries and put them to work towards to the greater goals of the CCP......

[@levelzanimations]

Short answer : because capitalism is expiring and facing its dying period!

[@panan7777]

For the 20th time...........

[@justzephan2267]

Quite literally… Cold War nonsense be popping tho

[@piccalillipit9211]

@@panan7777 NO - for the 1st time

[@piccalillipit9211]

*CORRECT ANSWER*

[@KSUser-0301]

*Wrong Answer*

[@martillodelajusticia7211]

shock therapy didn't work very well for eastern europe, when everything went to olygarcs

[@zacksmith5963]

China 0 recession China 0 inflation Usa recession Uk recession France recession Germany recessing India recession Taiwan recession