China's successful expansion in global ports....a capitalist failure to compete

WillJ8787

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jun 3, 2017
Posts
7,821
Source:
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/09/6425...ow-hold-stakes-in-over-a-dozen-european-ports

It is clear that China is successfully positions itself to be the works leader in global trade and as a superpower well into the next century.

Where is the response or the proactive advance of Capitalist forces to compete with China?

Hmmm? Is there something wrong here? If Capitalism and free markets are so great and powerful, where are they?
 
Source:
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/09/6425...ow-hold-stakes-in-over-a-dozen-european-ports

It is clear that China is successfully positions itself to be the works leader in global trade and as a superpower well into the next century.

Where is the response or the proactive advance of Capitalist forces to compete with China?

Hmmm? Is there something wrong here? If Capitalism and free markets are so great and powerful, where are they?

Strangled to death by do-gooder regulations from leftist like yourself and general political market mongering/protections creating effective monopolies over markets.

Can't have capitalism without a liberal society to support it. :)
 
Last edited:
Source:
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/09/6425...ow-hold-stakes-in-over-a-dozen-european-ports

It is clear that China is successfully positions itself to be the works leader in global trade and as a superpower well into the next century.

Where is the response or the proactive advance of Capitalist forces to compete with China?

Hmmm? Is there something wrong here? If Capitalism and free markets are so great and powerful, where are they?

Too bad they can't build a structure that lasts more than three years.
 
Of course you can. Pinochet did.

Pinochet was economically a neo-liberal who provided a very liberal economic environment (even more liberal than the USA still to this day) that prospered and made it #1 in GDP per capita in S. America to this very day despite the fact that other nations in S. America have far better resource availability.

Meanwhile the collectivist, equity seeking authoritarians like yourself in Venezuela..... are starving to death by the truck load. :D

Prosperity happens for those who want it when the left stops stamping out the peoples freedom to do so. ;)
 
Last edited:
Pinochet was economically a neo-liberal who provided a very liberal economic environment (even more liberal than the USA still to this day) that prospered and made it #1 in GDP per capita in S. America to this very day despite the fact that other nations in S. America have far better resource availability.

Meanwhile the collectivist, equity seeking authoritarians like yourself in Venezuela..... are starving to death by the truck load. :D

Prosperity happens for those who want it when the left stops stamping out the peoples freedom to do so. ;)

It is extremely disturbing that you find Pinochet's regime meets your standard of "liberal." It is even more disturbing that you would prefer it to Venezuela's, which is at any rate a democracy.
 
It is extremely disturbing that you find Pinochet's regime meets your standard of "liberal."

That's the political science and common consensus standard of liberal.

Liberal =/= leftist, progressive or Democrat.

Pinochet brought about and Chile still has one of the most liberal economies on the planet.

Deal with the facts. :)

It is even more disturbing that you would prefer it to Venezuela's, which is at any rate a democracy.

Why??

Choosing to prosper and live free instead of starving for democracy and equity sake is disturbing?? LOL

Not really shocking you find freedom loving liberals "disturbing".... most authoritarians do. :D
 
Last edited:
Can't compete with slave labor and no regulation.

Hmmm,.sounds like you are making an argument for decent and fair wages, a liveable minimum wage and "Govt" regulation (who else has the authority to regulate?).

I like your post.
 
Then what good is it? You wouldn't have wanted to live in Pinochet's Chile.

I do give him somewhat of a pass...on his own at 14, train wreck of a family, had to join the military as his way out of his troubles.that started at birth, which isn't his fault. He has no formal education.

What is his responsibility.... supporting traitors, murderers, evil facist folks who he admires (45 being an example), pathological liar, racist, authoritarian, nationalist and neo-facist. He could work on these by going and getting some professional help. Folks with problems have to acknowledge them a bit first....he will not.
 
Your words.

Not even remotely close.

Take your meds.

I do give him somewhat of a pass...on his own at 14, train wreck of a family, had to join the military as his way out of his troubles.that started at birth, which isn't his fault. He has no formal education.

What is his responsibility.... supporting traitors, murderers, evil facist folks who he admires (45 being an example), pathological liar, racist, authoritarian, nationalist and neo-facist. He could work on these by going and getting some professional help. Folks with problems have to acknowledge them a bit first....he will not.

More totally insane made up shit.

LOL

This is what happens when you don't have the intellect or character to support your vile political views.

Work on nationalism?? I don't need help.... because nationalism and liberalism aren't problems.

BTW you're the closest thing to a fascist here, except for maybe peck.
 
Last edited:
Then what good is it?

?? LOL

It identifies a particular set of political values.

It's not a fluff word to make the totalitarian and authoritarianism look better. :D

It has an actual meaning that is NOT "whatever psycho control freak shit the left wants" no matter how much you try to pretend it is.

You wouldn't have wanted to live in Pinochet's Chile.

Why not?? :confused:

Liberal society, liberal economy.... way better than any socialist shit hole, still is. :)
 
Can't compete with slave labor and no regulation.

This is still the best and most prescient post here.....

Slave labor.....the opposite is workers with rights, treated fairly and paid liveable wages.

No regulation....the opposite is regulation, fair regulation, regulation to level the playing field for all in a competitive environment.

Thanks Bobo, I mean Johnny....you sure did hit it perfectly!
 
This is still the best and most prescient post here.....

Slave labor.....the opposite is workers with rights, treated fairly and paid liveable wages.


Slavery by "progressive" economics.

And the bold part has nothing to do with slavery.

No regulation....the opposite is regulation, fair regulation, regulation to level the playing field for all in a competitive environment.

Define "fair" :)

Thanks Bobo, I mean Johnny....you sure did hit it perfectly!

No, you came up with some lopsided derp.
 
Hmmm,.sounds like you are making an argument for decent and fair wages, a liveable minimum wage and "Govt" regulation (who else has the authority to regulate?).

I like your post.

Absolutely. The greed and avarice of the human animal has to be restrained to function in a society. That's why there has never been a truly capitalistic economy.

The issue isn't whether or not regulation should exist, but how much.

China is eating our lunch because they don't pay their workers, they don't provide benefits, they don't comply with environmental regulations, the government provides the capital, the government prohibits competition. China learned from the mistakes of Lenin.
 
This is still the best and most prescient post here.....

Slave labor.....the opposite is workers with rights, treated fairly and paid liveable wages.

No regulation....the opposite is regulation, fair regulation, regulation to level the playing field for all in a competitive environment.

Thanks Bobo, I mean Johnny....you sure did hit it perfectly!

...and then you fell back into your hatefull, name-calling ways. So much for civil discussion.
 
Back
Top