how does google take your company's software product, repackage it, and charge monthly subscription for it without telling your CEO and legal team about it. Please, I'm all ears.
China certainly has very challenging and unique problems when it comes to infrastructures. The sheer size of the population, land mass, the scale of it is staggering.
If only they could open their eyes to democracy and freedom of human rights....then and only then will China be equipped to challenge the American/European hegemony, ushering in a new age of pan-east asian propserity.
Democracy usually follows economic development, not vice versa. Look at South Korea and Taiwan, they grew tremendously under authoritarian regimes and became democratic later after their GDP per capita hit a threshold (Singapore is somewhere in between, still pretty authoritarian).
I wonder if it is a proxy for sufficient education essentially (even a high school educated populace who can read the paper and instruction manuals can generate more wealth via factory work than subsidence farmers) vs simple hierarchy of needs where their main concerns are survival as opposed to any ideals like liberty or equality.
Quality education isn't a pancaea for demagoguery but it certainly helps. I believe that educated middle and lower end of upper class have been involved with revolutions frequently for better or worse outcomes.
They definitely correlate. In a democracy, you need a high level of education among all your voters since everyone can have an input on policy. And I'm sure more educated people start demanding for more representation.
Not going to happen... during our lifetimes? Ever? If you went to vegas and put money on it, what would you place the odds at if you put down serious money?
I only ask because your comment sounds like a very certain prediction, but few things are that certain beyond physics.
They grew tremendously because they turned their citizens into commodities at the hands of a few families who were able to bribe their way to the top.
Samsung, Hyundai, all of these guys built their company on the backs of children, women, and men which they exploited the shit out of.
Now, young Koreans are asking, was it worth it? With one of the highest youth unemployment and suicide rates in East Asia, existential questions are being raised about the authoritarian past.
I would've agreed with your statement 10 years ago, but now I'm not so certain, and I firmly believe that everybody is just repeating the government propaganda.
How the fuck is it that everybody just seem to know that authoritarian was responsible for economic revival? It's not even for debate. Yet we have countries like North Korea, still unable to dig themselves out of the economic recession. Argentina, South America, all had similar authoritarians and dictators, the only difference being that they possessed natural commodities that the Western countries could bribe and extract it out of that target country.
It's not exactly a secret as to the extent of subversive & covert actions of American corporations in exploiting South America for their rich natural resources. ex) United Fruit
When you don't have anything your land can provide to the empire, they accept human collateral, in the form of labor (slave?) or mercenaries. ex) South Korea's participation in the Vietnam War was traded for billions of dollars in US aid, that were spent on building the country's infrastructure.
Why is it that we have to be the richest? Why is it such a fucking competition, and why do we not stop and think, what the fuck is the reward at the end of the race created by Yet Another Empire?
You seem angry, you're right, we don't really get a say in the matter.
I also can't say if authoritarianism leads to economic revival, only that revival happened in spite of authoritarianism. In the same way that the Philippines has not done much economically in spite of democracy.
I can't say if it's worth it in the end, maybe the fisherman in Thailand is happier. But I'm grateful for the life I live. I've traveled around Asia, I've seen the developed and the non-developed, and I would prefer economic power over the latter.
yeah sometimes I just get jaded by how materialistic and superficial North American culture is.
as a visible minority, I honestly cannot have the same things that a white person would have without capital. This is just a fact of reality, no matter if I was born here or my kids are mixed, we will never be regarded as true equals. I hate what I have become. Just another immigrant that made it with a bit of money. But I needed to make this money just to have a shot at being treated equally by the mainstream.
It'd be nice to be accepted for who I am, not what I have. I long to be in a culture and society that isn't so materially obsessed...like Berlin.
it's nauseating....I think I need to leave North America for good....the North American Dream ultimately was revealed to me, just a futile exercise in consumption and mostly a dick measuring contest about who has what.
I can't believe I ditched thousands of years of culture and history for this fucking uncultured garbage they call the American Dream.
I traveled around for a few months and even though I'm back in the States I've become happier just knowing there's somewhere in the world where I'd blend in, and other parts where I now get the equivalent of what one would call privilege here. The world's a big and diverse place, don't wait till it's too late to see it.
The average Chinese today would not agree with you. Tell them about American democracy: they see Trump and a mess of irrational, petty infighting. Tell them about European democracy: they see Brexit and a perpetual stall in economic development. Now look to China’s leadership: while they may lack the freedoms of Western societies, the trade off has been such an incredible increase in quality of life that people born in 1990 to abject poverty can be living in solidly middle-class conditions nowadays (I know many such folks personally!).
The Chinese people as a whole are only going to agitate for democratic reform when (or if) their system of government stops serving them. Maybe a poor leader will emerge and shock the country into realizing they’ve centralized too much power; maybe the level of corruption will begin to significantly impede growth; maybe a rise in fortunes will make people yearn for freedoms they don’t have.
> maybe a rise in fortunes will make people yearn for freedoms they don’t have.
Actually this is a big thing already now as rich chinese people invest in western properties that the Chinese government can't seize.
If you are rich in an authoritarian country, all of your wealth can vanish quickly if you fall out of favour of the people who rule. This doesn't even have to be your own contribution, they can just say they take it. If you are rich in a western democracy, nothing much can happen to you.
They may see it that way but I'd argue it's a pretty myopic view. The US and the EU do most things better despite their political issues. Only focusing on their flaws is like rejecting free cash because some of the notes are dirty.
"It doesn't matter if a cat is black or white so long as it catches mice"
Democracy has a critical feature: it has a built-in method of nonviolent political succession which has been the norm in other regimes which don't plan for change (resulting in revolution, coup d'etats, etc). There will inevitably come a time where this is a useful feature again, and hopefully they manage to graft it in before it's too late.
Yes, the "first derivative" of their quality of life is impressive. The quality of life itself is not, when compared to many places in America / Europe (pollution being perhaps the biggest problem, even if you don't care about human rights / political rights).
So "the average Chinese" that you mentioned would be missing the forest for the trees, if they do think that way.
Pollution problem is being solved at incredible pace. Probably in 5 more years the environment will be better than US. Consider for example, how much new trees being planted across the country and in big cities.
Your implication that those Chinese who support current one party "regime" because they haven’t opened their eyes to democracy and freedom of human rights seems match current western media's unintended and also unanimous fabrication which is an unfalsifiable belief that doesn’t need any evidence but any body can still strongly insist it’s correct
This view is the dominant majority view of western countries that their citizens democratically elected their leaders with the same view who fight against “evils”, change regimes, based on a high moral ground with huge resources that otherwise can be invested in their own infrastructure. It caused huge humanitarian crises in Libya , Iraq, Syria , Yemen etc. that hundreds of thousands of lives lost.
In stead of give you some clue that the Chinese supporter of the one party regime do understand democracy, I can give you a clue that even the one party regime understand democracy and experimented with gradual baby steps began from village election.
There is little information about the result. West media have strong motivation to hide the experiment to match their narratives, the party also doesn’t want others know the embarrassed outcome. But many educated Chinese know: It’s a massive failure. Most winners are those good at gain powers and even bullies. Normal villagers hate election very much. China is not civilized enough yet (No worries for political correctness. I’m an ethnic Chinese) . So consider your belief about democracy and human rights again.
BTW, the topic of democracy and human rights is probably the major reason that fans Chinese nationalism and anti-Western sentiment that while westerners themselves heavily brainwashed (that alone is fine if not humiliate Chinese) by their independent free speech journalist believe it’s Chinese who are subhuman brainwashed by one Party propaganda. Just like the animals in “Animal Farm”
How can you possibly trust published information on the experiment? We can see from India's experience that democracy isn't going to work "as well" as in developed countries but we can't say anything about China's experience.
Yes, that's debatable. The party and its supporters could be wrong. But that's another topic on different premise.
The real issue here is many people make verdict based on strong belief based on what they know from media which could be totally fabricated illusion and insist their version of reality is only correct one cause problem.
she is going to jail. 100%. Not very long but....it will take many years before it even gets to the US court for a judgement. During this period, she will be in a cell.
Selling directly to Iran while rying to keep it hidden, was a bad idea. Now Huawei is banned from US, and pretty much all major economies.
I don't either and I assume there aren't any. The thing I would recommend to anyone living off of Youtube revenue is to diversify so you're not left with nothing if your channel gets taken down or demonitized.
Diversify to what, though? A portfolio of Treasury bonds and Monopoly money is not meaningfully diversified. If there is no other way to monetize video content than YouTube, there's no meaningful diversification you can do. You either have to eat the risk or leave the market.
I think he meant diversify "markets"... A.k.a work a part time job or something so in the event that your youtube revenue is nuked (as is happening more and more frequently), you'll still have a meaningful source of income (Many part time jobs have the ability to increase your hours as well if necessary).
That sort of "diversifying" is potentially not very practical - video production takes a lot of time and effort, so either you cut your output there to have time for a part-time job (is the part-time job giving you as much money per hour as the extra work you could have put into making more videos?) or you're now working a job and a half.
If you can make more from YouTube ads and per-video Patreon subscribers than you could by cutting your video production by half to fit in a part-time job, it might make more sense to stick to just videos but keep tabs on local part-timer opportunities. Less stable, but a higher net income until your channel goes down -> more able to last until you can get a part-time job? Not sure; I've been lucky enough not to have to worry about that sort of thing, so this is mostly speculation.
For video game streamers a lot of people diversify into a mix of twitch streaming, youtube videos, and patreon subscriptions, but it's not obvious that this is a viable path for the majority of youtube content creators.
Glassdoor, and filter by most helpful, since it's an open secret that startups write their own fucking reviews.
You always get the down lo when you read a highly upvoted review.
I know this one startup CEO he was caught lying publicly about writing his own glassdoor reviews. It was quite obvious (everybody in the company knew except the CEO).
