notsoshaihulud @ notsoshaihulud @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

366

Joined

6 mo. ago

why? tesla still represents the core of his wealth and once you've driven one, it's also a ketamine trip into musky's mind.

Okkay, thanks for confirming that this is a pointless conversation. :)

Bye

I think the benchmarks are Japan and South Korea, and their example suggest otherwise. Again, I do think it’s absolutely possible for China to overcome these challenges, but it’s not a given. Truth be told still more likely than the US fixing its fascist problem.

I’m not convinced that shrinking population is at all an issue for a developed country that can replace workers with technology.

OK, so why do other developed countries panic about shrinking and aging populations? Developed countries "solved" this issue by outsourcing low-skilled manual labor to China. But a population tree isn't only about manufacturing, it's also about caring for an aging population. Our growth-based economic systems are quite vulnerable to this.

China is already one if the most automated countries in the world and currently running the biggest infrastructure investments ever.

There's no precedence for infrastructure investments to resolve loss of workers on the scale that China is facing. Infrastructure also needs to be maintained by people. There's also an unprecedented potential for a real-estate crisis, considering the devaluation of housing if more and more becomes uninhabited.

I think if anyone can handle population reduction it’s probably China.

Sure, they just have to achieve like 2-3 unprecedented things that also come with unprecedented consequences, etc. These responses feel like being dismissive for sake of being dismissive. My point remains: the Western powers (and russia) are dealing with precedented, or at least predicted issues, many accelerated by aging despots. China has been winning putin's war, so time serves their purposes etc, but their hegemony isn't guaranteed either.

Yup. and the classic paradox of authoritarian systems is that if you name and train your successor, they'll sideline (I mean kill/imprison etc) you before your time is over, and if you make sure there's no clear successor, power vacuum is guaranteed.

CCP will have no trouble of succeeding Xi as it’s a single party system.

The farther term limits are in the past the harder it will be.

The population issue is heavily overblown

I'd say it's quite the opposite. Based on conversations with people who grew up in the one-child system and considering that one of the key elements of raising quality of life was reduction of births and spending more resources on these fewer kids, that are often traditionally raised by grandparents in their early years while parents are being economically productive. So people would have to compromise their present comfort to some extent to boost births. I've not seen a single nation in the world that succeeded in persistently raising births through pronatalist policy.

I'm not saying that this will be China's end, but realistically they have to either lower quality of life for the populace and/or really switch away from cheap manual labor as their primary model towards more automation etc.

...China basically has to do nothing to win geopolitica these days.

I totally agree with this part.

Generally speaking, autocrats have a shorter-than-average life expectancy. At least as leaders. Trump's mental and physical decline is very remarkable if you compare him to his 2015 self vs now. He's slow, he has difficulty holding his attention (see Crimea annex comment this Friday), but the US still has a succession system

The summary is reasonable though. Again we are cutting trump and his underlings a ton of slack about his campaign claims of fixing the war in 24 hours, and 6 weeks into his presidency. No, we should not accept political hyperbole just because it comes from trump, and Stephanopoulos was rightly asking how does calling Zelenskyy a dictator (and undercutting Ukraine-supporting allies) but sucking up to putin move peace talks forward?

As I said before, the way trump makes these deals is like putting duct tape on your passenger door, calling yourself a master mechanic, and then blame next mechanic when the car falls apart.

No, according to one of them they thought the country needed fixing, and he’s the one to do it.

People who think a person who handled COVID like trump did is an is the right person to manage a "crisis" he worked hard contributing to?!:D

China faces two issues nobody ever talks about.

1. Xi Jinping is old so within years, he'll need a successor....and with authoritarian systems, succession can be bloody.
2. China is facing a demographic collapse they have zero grip on at the moment. They might lose half their population by the end of the century. and their population hit peak in 2021, and just in the next decade they are projected to lose 50M people, (so this isn't hat far as many people think)

this license thing is funny and all, but if you get distracted from the conversation if someone accidentally pulls it in a quote then it's quite counterproductive. we've now had 3 posts revolving around it, and still no answer to the original question.

that was the question:D

With these:

(sorry)

Listening to this guy reminded me of Thank You for Smoking, which is a dark comedy of a tobacco industry spokes person trying to make smoking cool and acceptable again. So much bullshit, so little substance. Marco, we've all seen your face during the meeting, bullshitting like this won't save it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3eeTjK0qZY

There's nothing wrong with his ottoman erotic fixation either.:)

Jokes aside, I think guyliner is fair game to mock someone trying to be the arbiter of "traditional masculinity".

Firstly, "guyliner"?!:) I love it!!! Guyliner Couchthrob (it's immature but it contains no less truth than most of the things that come out of his mouth...).

On the actual context, and as some of the other comments line it out, there appear to be 3 subtle concurrent fault lines here:

1. Trump who is only for himself (and putin).
2. Musk
3. The tech broligarchy whose goal is long-term power consolidation through propping up Guyliner Couchthrob as the successor

I think it's clear that trump will throw musk under the bus when he'll need a sudden boost in popularity. His plans with Guyliner are much less clear, I'm sure he's considering to keep him for medvedev/putin type of setup (from back when russia had term limits, LOL).

I don't think the title could be any more clickbaity.

"Musk’s purges suddenly take a horrific turn—and wreck an ugly MAGA lie"

<Unpopular person doing unpopular thing>

It's AI slop... Reddit's BS stories were much more creative until LLMs came along. still remember Colby...

lemmy guess, single-issue voters

vance does have an excuse: he was distracted by the couch