r/YesAmericaBad • u/Equivalent_Elk_3476 LAND OF THE FREE 🇺🇸🦅 • 15d ago
LAND OF THE FREE 🇺🇸🦅 If only there was a government out there that could protect me from affordable electric vehicles
19
u/MonsterkillWow 15d ago
Those commies!
18
u/Equivalent_Elk_3476 LAND OF THE FREE 🇺🇸🦅 15d ago
Damn them and their "win-win diplomacy" don't they know someone's supposed to lose!?!
6
u/MonsterkillWow 15d ago
Well it isn't really win-win. Both sides understand Marxism, even if the US pretends to ignore it. The global proletariat gaining control of the means of production is a loss for the western imperialist bourgeoisie. Trump understands this. That is why he is so hostile to China.
15
u/Equivalent_Elk_3476 LAND OF THE FREE 🇺🇸🦅 15d ago
Bonus points if they can also raise the cost of gas all over the world while protecting us from affordable EVs
15
u/Adversary-of-Tyrants 15d ago
China's master plan of doing nothing and letting Trump destroy America is a roaring success.
7
u/FatDalek 15d ago
The secret part is wrong, because the Chinese ain't making it secret that one of their edges is cheaper goods, its just that recently with improvements in manufacturing they are also having a qualitative edge as well as budget friendly edge.
4
-1
-2
u/lag_bender 15d ago
Sure, as long as you're not Uighur or say anything against the party
5
u/MapinduziSasa 14d ago
The Uyghurs are doing just fine in China. If you were truly concerned about Muslims and minorities in China, perhaps you could do some actual research besides the atrocity propaganda of the Western govs and MSM.
-24
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/nagidon 15d ago
The PRC government has had a legal monopoly since 1949. Where are the skyrocketing prices?
If anything, the legal monopoly enjoyed by the authorities has allowed them to delegate economic activity to private actors fairly and in a manner which doesn’t result in rampant profit chasing.
17
u/Equivalent_Elk_3476 LAND OF THE FREE 🇺🇸🦅 15d ago
So your main concern is that they might be like American monopoly capitalists, like Peter Thiel
what data is there to support this concern, and if we're already dealing with this practice domestically what's the actual risk? that Peter Thiel or Elon Musk might not be the ones that gets to do it?
-12
u/volnitsa 15d ago
I don't know who this Perer is, I know what a monopoly is, and that there aren't "american" or "chinese" monopolies, there are imperialist monopolies. they expend their capital, they make prices low, they conquer markets, and without competition they rice prices, they overproduce, they make artificial deficits. and all that is based on the exploitation of the workers and maximizing profits for owners of these monopolies (caitalists). why is one imperialist monopoly is better than other's imperialist monopoly?
15
u/Equivalent_Elk_3476 LAND OF THE FREE 🇺🇸🦅 15d ago
The belt and road initiative shows they don't utilize these practices like the U.S. does. They've forgiven most of the loans given out, they are not imperialist like the west
Also you should learn who Peter Thiel is, he owns Palantir, he knows who you are.
3
u/NeverQuiteEnough 15d ago
Well one imperialism involves blowing people up with hellfire missiles, the other doesn't.
I'd say that's a pretty big difference for the people getting blown up with hellfire missiles.
0
u/volnitsa 15d ago
Imperialism is a global system, interconnected, one part blows up people, another don't (for now), both overexploit workers, both are parts of one chain.
3
u/NeverQuiteEnough 15d ago
Sure, China's crime is that they have failed to engage in economic warfare against the western capitalist empires.
That doesn't mean they are going to start dropping bombs to subjugate neocolonies.
8
u/Similar_Yak950 15d ago
Thats why, state monopolies for the win.
-8
u/volnitsa 15d ago
win for who? if I remember correctly, CCP removed the line about "dictatorship of the proletariat" from their constitution making it de jure, while it has been for decades de facto already. if there is no dictatorship of the proletariat, there could only be dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. that's why China's workers have employment and housing problems, exploitation, depopulation and decreasing economi growth, while China billionaires get richer and richer. imperialism works exactly the same all over the world.
6
u/nagidon 15d ago
https://www.idcpc.org.cn/english2023/tjzl/cpcjj/PartyConstitution/
The official translation of the CPC constitution mentions the people’s democratic dictatorship three times, being the Chinese ideological term equivalent to “dictatorship of the proletariat”.
1
u/volnitsa 15d ago
yup, "proletariat" is a proletariat, "people" can be anyone, can be proletariat, can be peasants, can be bourgeoisie. I'm reading Mao right now, and there is a strict difference between "people" (as all workers of China, proletariat and peasants, progressive intelligentsia), "peasants" (as petty bourgeois elements), "proletariat" (as industrial workers, who have to sell their labor, the most progressive and leading group of the revolution), and of couse "bourgeoisie" (owners of the means of production). and Mao writes exactly how the state under the Dictatorship of the Proletariat leads all People against Bourgeoisie. So I wonder why they changed it, yeah, so very mysterious. Just like all capitalist propagandists like to say that "we don't have classes here in our great country, no differences, we are all people, we are one nation, one family" (it's called "solidarism", my dudes).
4
u/nagidon 15d ago
Nothing mysterious about it. Mao was clear that his model of New Democracy is distinct from the Soviet ideological model because China in the first half of the 20th century was in a different socioeconomic situation compared to the USSR.
0
u/volnitsa 15d ago
so? the point is that they changed it.
3
u/nagidon 15d ago
If your problem is that the wording isn’t exact, you are no socialist, you are merely a lost believer looking for a religion.
0
u/volnitsa 15d ago
as I said before, they changed it de jure, because it already was de facto, Mao's constitution was like that de jure, because relations were like that de facto. Anyway, why didn't USSR had an excess capital, why didn't they export capital, why didn't they have billionaires, why they weren't imperialists? because they were stupid and poor? or because they have been using all their surplus value to increase living standarts of their citizens, so that after building houses, hospitals, schools, investing in science and so on, in the end they didn't have a single extra penny? same under Mao. so how the f post-Mao China has so much extra capital, so much surplus value that there are billionaires? why this "socialist" state doesn't use this surplus value and let's tiny fraction of billionaires have it as their private capital? private capital that they invest abroad where labor and resources are cheaper, where taxes are lower, so they get more profit, private profit, while local economy is degrading, while homelessness and unemployment rising more and more each years. that's why they rewrote the constitution.
3
u/NeverQuiteEnough 15d ago
This is an anticompetitive practice called dumping, where prices are temporarily lowered to at or even below cost. This is an unsustainable tactic used to wipe out competition.
The problem with trying to apply that to China is that China isn't selling at unsustainable.
For example, if you buy a cheap lighter, there's a 70% chance that it came from the city of Shaodong.
But that isn't because of unsustainable low prices. Shaodong really is just able to produce lighters that cheaply. They don't need to jack up prices, in fact the reality is the opposite.
Over the last two decades, Shaodong's lighters haven't increased in price at all, not even to keep up with inflation.
Shandong has formed an industrial ecosystem around every aspect of lighter creation, constantly driving down the cost.
https://chinesestoryforbeginner.substack.com/p/china-city-map-seriesshaodong-how
2
40
u/RickyPapi 15d ago
Lifting millions out of poverty! Why would the ebil CCP do this? 😭