Also he is a libertarian
Econ profs are absolutely blinded by ideology. Everything will plateau at some point of course, but how could you possibly think China will reach it's growth ceiling in just a few years. They are just hooked on that sweet sweet :cope: and can't accept that socialism out preforms capitalism under capitalism's own guidelines for success
Then China started filling them and everyone just wiped that criticism from existence like they never said it. Gotta keep our enemy looking as incompetent as a Saturday morning cartoon villain
turns out those empty cities were a really good idea once china's urbanization boom really took off. Now there's already houses and everything for those people where the jobs are. In socialist america we really should do something similar to handle the climate refugees, get them housed and working immediately to prepare for the next wave of migrants.
China is socialist only to the extent that it's state capitalist economy is in a 'Transitional' state, that's where the debate actually lays, and the transitionalists can point to China's radical violations of global capitalist conventions and consensus as proof of this long term "shift" toward DotP
Of course the debate is hardly settled, but what "educated economist" would look at China's developmental strategy of regional experimental state control on the level of municipalities and conclude "yeah these folks hate economic planning and government ownership"
In the Communist manifesto among other places.
The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.
Also how would you decide what is “genuinely transitional” and what is it transitioning to?
Organizational structures that undermine the modern logic of private capital accumulation and elevates worker and community ownership of the means of productions either thru local representative bodies or direct control, eventually leading to the abolition of commodity form, that's what I mean by transitional
China's regional devolution policies toward local municipal representative party control of state owned enterprises points to an outline of a transitional state in its early stages
Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.
Marx, Critique of the Gotha Program (1875)
Not saying this is what China is, but if a vague outline of this transformation does develop because of Chinese regional devolution, well bucko we're in business
As much as it's memed on, one of the primary contradictions of socialism/communism and command economies built on those principles (USSR) is literally "communism no iPhone". We as workers under bourgeois dictatorship and exploitation can see that it's all a lie, but those living in the USSR genuinely wanted Western consumer goods.
The productive forces of the Soviet states weren't really designed for that sort of consumer production though as they were developed for war and siege. This led to a massive lack of consumer goods and the formation of huge black markets to fulfill the demand that the state couldn't.
China saw this and attempted to solve it by just getting all the western companies to build their consumer goods factories there. Which so far seems to have worked really fucking well...
Ok, sure. But have you considered that everything before Deng's privatization reforms were a failure and everything after Deng doesn't count?
I know there is a struggle session abt whether they are a DotP or not, so Im going to ignore that to avoid getting banned for sectarianism.
You're gonna ignore that but the rest of your comment is literally about that lmao.
What the fuck do you think the struggle session is about? Do you really think anybody is under the illusion that China is an actual socialist economy?
i'm only seeing a fragmented conversation here as the person deleted all their replies. So what i wanna ask is, is that bad? Didn't Lenin's last speech before his death also call the USSR a state capitalist society who's working to being socialist?
This is El Presisente winning the rigged Tropico elections by 97% rather than 100%. That 3 point difference is how you know it's real!
Somehow the USA is increasing its share of global GDP after 2040, despite having less than 4% of the world's population by then.
"Alright, so, the absolute MOMENT that we no longer have recorded data to use for this graph, my team will start winning, and the guys I don't like start losing. But you commies wouldn't know anything about basic economics like that, heh."
He's even using old data lol, this graph stops in 2008 and everything after is just projection
We even have data from 2018 that immediately contradicts this graph (from a website called "visual capitalist" so not commie propaganda)
When even the free marketeers can't massage the data enough they just blindly claim that China's economy will slow down because it has to lol.
the instructor started on some bullshit about how China was going to overtake the US in a decade, but with COVID it’s going to be like 5 years now
They’re not wrong.
there hasn’t been a time where there’s been more than one superpower in the world.
quality education from quality educators
It’s just China vs US demographic curves. China is going to shrink a bit in the mid 2030s and the US will grow during that period off current projections. What happens in reality is anyone’s guess. China isn’t as stable as people generally think of it as here, it could actually open up immigration, some new tech skews global power on a wild course and the US could just implode. 2030 is a long ways away still.
And tbh the race for an advanced AI cannot be downplayed. It's a bit of a winner-takes-all situation that could radically change the world order. All the better reason to have socialized ownership of production to prevent slipping further into a tech oligarchic nightmare.
lmfao this motherfucker didn't use math he just drew colored lines :michael-laugh:
Suuuure.
Also, this is why I don’t wanna take any econ classes. All the profs/students seem real annoying.
"You see, that motivates firms to innovate and become more efficient. Those savings are reaped by society. What? Justice and distribution? Innovation is not always productive but can include rent seeking and anti-competitve practices instead of efficiency? No no, those are questions for the political science or philosophy department. We're a descriptive discipline, not normative. Now let's get back to how cost-effective it is to deprive the poor."
"huh china seems to be dominating america on this economic graph I drew, that can't be right. I've checked the data so many times though... for some reason it's not saying china bad. That's okay, I'll just fix the numbers to account for american exceptionalism"
